Christianity and Constitutionalism, NicholasAroney and IanLeigh (eds), Oxford University Press, 2022 (ISBN 978‐0‐19‐758726‐3), xii + 500 pp., pb £29.99
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Christianity and Constitutionalism, edited by Nicholas Aroney (Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Queensland School of Law) and Ian Leigh (Emeritus Professor of Law at Durham University), is an important collection of essays examining the contributions of Christianity to constitutional law and constitutionalism. This volume combines historical, legal, and theological perspectives to provide an all-encompassing exploration into how Christian principles have helped shape constitutional law. The book's twenty-two chapters, are an imposing and impressive compendium of scholarly discourse, first conceived in the context of an initial workshop held at Durham University in November 2018. The editors arrange the book in three parts, each addressing a distinct aspect of the Christian contribution to constitutionalism. Part I is historical in nature ‘and is therefore primarily oriented to the past’ (p. 13); it focuses on the historical influence of Christianity to constitutionalism, tracing its impact from the Old and New Testaments to the Reformation and modernity, and asks how constitutionalism came to be, and what was Christianity's contribution to that development. Part I's historical itinerary is very clearly set out in the sequence of the title chapters themselves, offering quite comprehensive coverage: Old Testament, New Testament, Antiquity, Patristic Era, Middle Ages, Reformation, Modernity (one might have certain qualms about the historiographical rigidity of these latter categories in view of contemporary research, but anyhow these are the broad categories of European Christian history according to ‘received wisdom’). Through the examination of figures such as Moses, Augustine, Luther, and Cranmer, the authors highlight how Christian thought shaped ideas of law, government, and constitutionalism throughout different eras. Highlights include, inter alia, Jonathan Burnside's exploration of the Old Testament's influence on constitutionalism and Joan Lockwood O′Donovan's critique of modern constitutionalism from the perspective of English Reformation Public Theology. The chapters draw heavily on historical analysis to provide insights into the nature of Christian influence on law and government. Even as a stand-alone part, Part I forms an important resource into the history of the Christian roots of (primarily European, in a broad sense) constitutionalism. Part II delves into the implicit and explicit Christian pedigrees of central constitutional doctrines and principles. It is the properly legal part ‘and is accordingly oriented mostly to the present. It asks: how is constitutionalism today understood, and what contribution can Christianity make to that understanding?’ (p. 13). Topics such as sovereignty, the rule of law, democracy, separation of powers, human rights, freedom of conscience, and federalism are analysed from diverse Christian viewpoints. By engaging with these topics, the book sheds light on the multitude of ways in which Christian traditions have influenced and continue to inform constitutional theory and practice. Joel Harrison's exploration of sovereignty and Carlos Bernal's discussion of the biblical foundations of the separation of powers are to be counted among the many chapters that will be particularly useful resources for advanced students working on those topics, as are the editors' own chapters on the ‘archaeology’ of federalism (Nicholas Aroney) and religious freedom/freedom of conscience (Ian Leigh). Li-ann Thio's chapter on the ‘sacred roots and secular shoots’ (as the title aptly puts it) of the rule of law is also particularly noteworthy. After the ‘historical’ Part I and the properly ‘legal’ Part II, we move on to the more explicitly ‘theological’ Part III in the book's tripartite—or, as the editors say, ‘trinitarian’—organisation. Again, chapter titles eloquently betray this: Revelation, Trinity, Christology, Justice, Natural law, Subsidiarity, and Eschatology (and were one to ask what has eschatology to do with constitutionalism and legal theory, Douglas Farrow's chapter has much to say on this). For, as the editors write, this last part ‘is theological and is therefore oriented to the future. It asks: what might constitutionalism become, and what contribution might Christianity make to that development? The chapters in this part focus on the contribution of particular theological doctrines to our understanding of constitutionalism’ (p. 13). Although John Milbank's discussion of natural law stands out, all chapters are particularly interesting and though-provoking, as accomplished theologians are called to reflect on the purpose and nature of political communities in ways that are not always present in theological discussions—and, rather obviously, Part III is also a stand-alone resource in political theology. These chapters offer an enlightening intersection of theology and law, further enriching the conversation about Christianity's contribution to constitutionalism. The editors, Nicholas Aroney and Ian Leigh, have assembled a thought-provoking collection of essays that successfully probe the intersections of Christianity and constitutionalism; I particularly liked the intelligent structure of the book. The volume successfully traverses the historical, legal, and theological landscapes to provide a well-rounded exploration of the topic. This not only enhances the reader's understanding but also fosters appreciation for the enduring influence of Christianity on constitutionalism. The volume would make a valuable resource for scholars and advanced students interested in constitutional law, history, or theology (including political theology), and particularly those keen on the study of Christian influence on law and politics. In conclusion, Christianity and Constitutionalism is a monumental work that offers a comprehensive, insightful, and profound exploration of the historical, legal, and theological perspectives of the relationship between Christianity and constitutional law. It is an academic tome of great worth, serving to both enlighten and provoke further scholarly discourse. The meticulous research, interdisciplinary approach, and diverse perspectives make it an essential read for those studying law, theology, history, and political science.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».