What I Mean By "Justice"

The intention of this blog is to explore ideas of justice and social justice.  I loathe these words.  They can be put in front of everything that needs an adjective to justify my soapbox.  “Justice” is cliché.  “Justice” has no meaning.  The problem is that there isn’t another word to take its place.  So, I use “justice” and hate myself for the cliché.  It is important – at least for me – that I explain what I mean when I use the word “justice.”

The first thing that is necessary to understand is that my definition of justice exists within a theological framework.  I am a Christian and (I think) I am writing from a distinctly Christian worldview.  My definition will therefore have a certain tint (although some may want to add an “a”). 

I see justice as including four aspects.  If each aspect is not present, justice is not present.  First, justice is about power.  Gary Haugen writes that justice is the “right exercise of power or authority.”  It is important that power is properly used because power comes from God.  Right use of power has at least two requirements.  One, powerful people must acknowledge their own weakness and fallibility.  Two, powerful people must act.  William Wilberforce pointed out that Jesus was active on earth.  A powerful person must imitate this by using power actively and responsibly.

Second, justice is rooted in Christ.  Apart from Jesus, justice is ultimately corrupt.  Dietrich Bonhoeffer made this point in Ethics but it makes me wonder.  I’ve seen and heard of many people whose commitment to justice appears very real despite their not having faith in Christ.  My commitment to justice – which is tiny compared to some folks who don’t share (or may even oppose) my faith – comes purely from my Christianity.  I cannot fathom anything but selfishness without my faith.  Bonhoeffer speaks to this by claiming that anyone who practices justice is Christ’s.  John Stott explains that justice is a condition of true humanity because justice allows people to exist in the dignity that God gave them.

Third, justice focuses on “the other.”  Stott and Alan Starky both explain that if people with power are just, they are responsible for the well-being of the other.  The Law commands people to speak about issues important to the well-being of those who are too weak to be heard.  The prophets partly focus on disenfranchised people.  Jesus commands people to love enemies.  A just person is prepared to relinquish his or her own rights while acknowledging the rights of the other.

Fourth, for justice to occur, injustice must be absent.  This likely seems obvious based solely on semantics, but it is a bit more complex.  If a person uses her power properly, responds to victims the way Christ would, and prioritizes the rights of others, justice will not be automatic.  Haugen explains injustice as power used to “take from others what God has given them.”  Ronald Sider follows this thinking by explaining that for justice to happen, a powerful and just person must confront a powerful and abusive person.

There are three qualities that surround and complement justice, but are not absolutely synonymous with it.  Donald Bloesch explains the difference between justice and love.  Love and justice cannot exist without one another, but they are separate.  Justice is temporal because it is a response to the sin of injustice.  This sin only exists in this age and – like all sin – will be obliterated in Christ’s fulfilled Kingdom.  True, Christ’s Kingdom will be just, but this will be a natural way of life as opposed to a response to sin.  If justice is a response, love is the motivation for the response.

Similarly, justice and freedom are not synonymous as explained by Dennis Hollinger.  Actually, justice limits freedom.  If a violent crime is perpetrated, justice may require a period of imprisonment.  In these cases, justice requires that someone’s freedom cannot co-exist with justice.  To ensure that each person is equal and has equal opportunity for survival, justice will restrict a more powerful person from acquiring unlimited goods at the expense of others.

Finally – also noted by Bloesch – justice is not a utopian ideal.  For Christians, justice does require an amount of social engagement but does not have the goal of creating the ideal world.  Instead, justice focuses on making society equal, or at least allows it to approach equality.  Justice asks what is realistically attainable now rather than what is ultimate.

When I write the word “justice” I hope this is what I mean.

Although I won’t be using formal footnotes, several authors were referred to above.  The books are:

Donald G. Bloesch, Freedom for Obedience, Harper & Row, 1987.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics, Touchstone, 1955.

Gary A. Haugen, Good News About Injustice, InterVarsity Press, 1999.

Dennis P. Hollinger, Choosing the Good, Grand Rapids, 2002.

Ronald J. Sider, The Scandal of Evangelical Politics, Baker Books, 2008.

Alan Storkey,  Jesus and Politics, Baker Academic, 2005.

John Stott, et al, Issues Facing Christians Today  4th Ed., Zondervan, 2006.

William Wilberforce, Christianity and the Good Society, River Oak Press, 1999.

This essay began life as a longer, academic essay.  Other references for the longer form – which likely shape this shorter version – include:

C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Touchstone, 1980.

Reinhold Niebuhr, Love and Justice, Meridian Books, 1957.

Glen H. Stassen and David P. Gushee, Kingdom Ethics, Intervarsity Press, 2003.

John Wesley, "Causes of the Inefficacy of Christianity," Sermons, Volume 2, Eaton & Mains, 1904.

N. T. Wright, Evil and the Justice of God, InterVarsity Press, 2006.