Jonathan Chaplin

How Much Cultural and Religious Pluralism can Liberalism Tolerate

The purpose of this paper is to explore the question of the degree of cultural and religious pluralism which would be tolerated by a consistently applied liberalism. I shall do this by examining the views of three contemporary liberal political philosophers: Robert Nozick, Will Kymlicka and Joseph Raz. By assessing their varying conceptions of pluralism and the limits they each place upon it, some light can be shed on the liberal tradition as a whole.

Can Nations be ‘Christian’?

This article explores and challenges the increasingly popular idea that nations can be corporately Christian. Advocates of a ‘Christian nation’ stance hold that a strategic goal of Christian public action is to defend or restore the nations essentially Christian character. The article expounds this view as expressed in recent statements of British public theologians and church leaders. A core underlying assumption is then identified: that nations today can collectively be addressed by, respond to, and be held accountable to God, along the lines of biblical Israel. It is argued that this grounding lacks adequate biblical support.

Dooyeweerd’s Notion of Societal Structural Principles

The notion of societal structural principles is the foundation stone of Dooyeweerd’s social philosophy, and of the political and legal philosophy grounded in it, yet it has so far received little detailed critical analysis or constructive reformulation among reformational scholars. The aim of this paper is the modest one of illustrating the kind of analysis still to be done if the notion is to be put to more constructive use within social theory. I shall say little about the epistemological or methodological implications of the notion, concentrating on its central ontological problematics. I shall do so by discussing the notion with special reference to its specific application to one particular societal structure, namely the state. Part I analyses Dooyeweerd’s general account of the notion of societal structural principles. I identify there a number of critical problems running through the paper, especially: a) the problem of how structural principles secure the internal unity of a societal structure; b) the distinction between the invariant character of societal structural principles, and the variable forms in which they are positivised; and c) the undeveloped link between societal structures and the structure of the human person. Part II illustrates these problems (especially the second) in relation to Dooyeweerd’s account of the structural principle of the state. Part III briefly sketches the direction of a possible reformulation of the notion of societal structural principles in the light of a more fully elaborated philosophical anthropology.

Liberté, Laïcité, Pluralité: Towards a Theology of Principled Pluralism

While the Charlie Hebdo attacks unleashed a highly distinctive national debate within France, that debate also serves to throw into sharp relief the deepening tensions generated by increasingly complex relationships between the state and religion across much of Europe, not least due to the arrival of immigrant minority faiths wishing to advance claims in what is widely assumed to be ‘secular’ public space. After reviewing these tensions, the article distinguishes five current European responses to them and proposes a model of ‘principled pluralism’ as a theologically defensible option. The original theological roots of such a model are outlined and six indicative contemporary practical implications proposed.

God, Justice and Society

The papers in this issue were first presented at a colloquium on Biblical Law held at the Divinity Faculty, University of Cambridge on 19-20 March 2012. The event, co-sponsored by the Kirby Laing Institute for Christian Ethics and the Cambridge Interfaith Programme, was a critical engagement with a major new contribution to the analysis and contemporary application of biblical law: God, Justice and Society: Aspects of Law and Legality in the Bible by Jonathan Burnside.2 The event brought together biblical scholars, theological ethicists and lawyers, and representatives of Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The principal focus of God, Justice and Society (GJS) is, naturally, the legal material in the Hebrew Bible. So it is particularly pleasing to include here the contributions of experts both in Christianity and Judaism— among the latter, notably, the distinguished authority in biblical law Professor Bernard Jackson whose semiotic approach to interpreting scripture has been highly formative for Burnside’s book (and to whom the book is dedicated). Our conversations at the colloquium were also much enriched by papers from two specialists in Islamic law, but unfortunately neither was able to submit their contribution due to circumstances beyond their control. In his concluding contribution, Nicholas Aroney goes some way to mitigating this absence by bringing certain features of biblical law into comparison with Islamic law. Regrettably, Jonathan Burnside, who responded orally to each paper at the colloquium, was himself also unable

Catholic political thought: what can evangelicals learn?

which attempt for reconciliation without restitution, can in effect serve only to perpetuate existing racism. Yet government policies of affirmative action have been, at best, imperfect mechanisms. While current affirmative action policies may be clumsy and not completely just, eliminating them without replacement would be a grave injustice. Because of persistent racism, people of colour are disproportionately represented among the poor and economically disadvantaged of the United States. Thus, an aggressive, class-based approach to affirmative action might be a just and effective means of redressing the economic effects of racism. Although the civil rights movement helped to end racial segregation as official policy, much of our country remains segregated, particularly in our urban centres. At this time we must vigorously work on two fronts: first to build and strengthen strong black institutions; second to remove the remaining barriers to full participation in society by people of colour. Public policy should ensure that government-funded programmes do become more vigorous and should be fully funded.