Conscience and the continuum of constitutionalism: John Calvin on civil government

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Constance Lee
{"title":"Conscience and the continuum of constitutionalism: John Calvin on civil government","authors":"Constance Lee","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwad018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines John Calvin’s theology on its own terms with the aim of appreciating the normative basis and implications of his political theory. Although the claim that Calvin’s account of civil government falls within the category of political ‘theology’ is less controversial, the normative implications of his theological ontology for political actors are more commonly contested. Calvin seminally wrote ‘on Civil Government’ in Book IV, Chapter xx of the Institutes of the Christian Religion. In contrast, his accounts of conscience and natural law are far less systemized.1 This article contends that this reticence is not due to lack of importance but rather, due to its foundational nature. Indeed, the opening statement of the Institutes is indicative of the coherence of the Reformer’s thoughts wherein any emerging polity is composed of what this article refers to as the ‘spheres-of-influence’ scheme—a normative system originating inward from the vertical relationship every human agent has with the divine, and then extending horizontally outwards to bind the collective in a common system of values. Such an ontology is predicated on the concepts of conscience and the divine image, which renders all persons, who possess this natural repository of moral knowledge, accountable to transcendent standards of virtue. It follows that when we overlay this ‘continuum’2 onto a constitutional framework, we place the priority, not on the individual rights of the citizen, but on the responsibilities of all political actors whereby others precede the self and the common good prevails over self-interest.","PeriodicalId":44058,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","volume":"184 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojlr/rwad018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines John Calvin’s theology on its own terms with the aim of appreciating the normative basis and implications of his political theory. Although the claim that Calvin’s account of civil government falls within the category of political ‘theology’ is less controversial, the normative implications of his theological ontology for political actors are more commonly contested. Calvin seminally wrote ‘on Civil Government’ in Book IV, Chapter xx of the Institutes of the Christian Religion. In contrast, his accounts of conscience and natural law are far less systemized.1 This article contends that this reticence is not due to lack of importance but rather, due to its foundational nature. Indeed, the opening statement of the Institutes is indicative of the coherence of the Reformer’s thoughts wherein any emerging polity is composed of what this article refers to as the ‘spheres-of-influence’ scheme—a normative system originating inward from the vertical relationship every human agent has with the divine, and then extending horizontally outwards to bind the collective in a common system of values. Such an ontology is predicated on the concepts of conscience and the divine image, which renders all persons, who possess this natural repository of moral knowledge, accountable to transcendent standards of virtue. It follows that when we overlay this ‘continuum’2 onto a constitutional framework, we place the priority, not on the individual rights of the citizen, but on the responsibilities of all political actors whereby others precede the self and the common good prevails over self-interest.
良心与宪政的连续性:约翰·加尔文论公民政府
本文考察了加尔文的神学,目的是欣赏他的政治理论的规范基础和含义。尽管加尔文对公民政府的描述属于政治“神学”范畴的说法争议较少,但他对政治行动者的神学本体论的规范含义却更有争议。加尔文在《基督教要论》第4卷第20章中写了“论公民政府”。相比之下,他对良心和自然法的描述远没有那么系统化本文认为,这种沉默不是由于缺乏重要性,而是由于其基本性质。事实上,《政治研究所》的开篇陈述表明了改革者思想的连贯性,其中任何新兴政体都是由本文所称的“势力范围”计划组成的——一个向内起源于每个人类主体与神的垂直关系的规范体系,然后向外水平延伸,将集体束缚在一个共同的价值体系中。这种本体论是建立在良心和神的形象的概念之上的,这使得所有拥有这种自然的道德知识宝库的人,都要对超越的美德标准负责。因此,当我们将这种“连续体”覆盖到宪法框架中时,我们将优先考虑的不是公民的个人权利,而是所有政治行为者的责任,在这种情况下,他人优先于自己,共同利益高于自身利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: Recent years have witnessed a resurgence of religion in public life and a concomitant array of legal responses. This has led in turn to the proliferation of research and writing on the interaction of law and religion cutting across many disciplines. The Oxford Journal of Law and Religion (OJLR) will have a range of articles drawn from various sectors of the law and religion field, including: social, legal and political issues involving the relationship between law and religion in society; comparative law perspectives on the relationship between religion and state institutions; developments regarding human and constitutional rights to freedom of religion or belief; considerations of the relationship between religious and secular legal systems; and other salient areas where law and religion interact (e.g., theology, legal and political theory, legal history, philosophy, etc.). The OJLR reflects the widening scope of study concerning law and religion not only by publishing leading pieces of legal scholarship but also by complementing them with the work of historians, theologians and social scientists that is germane to a better understanding of the issues of central concern. We aim to redefine the interdependence of law, humanities, and social sciences within the widening parameters of the study of law and religion, whilst seeking to make the distinctive area of law and religion more comprehensible from both a legal and a religious perspective. We plan to capture systematically and consistently the complex dynamics of law and religion from different legal as well as religious research perspectives worldwide. The OJLR seeks leading contributions from various subdomains in the field and plans to become a world-leading journal that will help shape, build and strengthen the field as a whole.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信