What Kind of System Embodies Justice?
什么样的制度具有正义性
By William Luo
【Editor’s Note: America’s founding is rooted in the belief that God endowed individuals with intrinsic value and sovereignty, forming the basis for a just political order. This framework is exemplified in Augustine’s theory of two cities—the City of God, governed by divine love, and the City of the Devil, marked by self-centeredness. While Augustine claimed no earthly political system could embody the City of God, later interpretations, such as Hans Leisegang’s, suggested an “earthly City of God” reflecting divine equality and justice.
The United States, with its republican principles and foundational belief in equality under God, shows aspects of this ideal but falls short of fully realizing it. Scholars like Zhang Qianfan challenge the universality of religious nation-building, emphasizing the distinction between America’s founding values and the failures of other religious states. America’s blend of conservatism and liberalism, encapsulated in its Constitution and Bill of Rights, balances tradition with individual freedom, maintaining a dynamic, enduring political order.】
America’s claim to a just founding lies in the belief that God has endowed individuals with intrinsic value and sovereignty. This founding value, rooted in an absolute truth, is self-evident and needs no further proof. Its authority stems from God’s authority. “Individual sovereignty” is a divinely granted right—inalienable and impossible to cede. Those in power are merely entrusted with the functions of executing and administering the rights of the people, specifically the legislative, judicial, and executive aspects of social governance. Yet the ownership of one’s “individual sovereignty” cannot be conferred or transferred. Though this view of personal worth and sovereignty bestowed by God is transcendent, it bears practical significance: by accepting God’s authority and humanity’s God-given value, people share a moral boundary that none may trespass. A nation founded on this covenant is seen as the “City of God on earth.”
Augustine (奥古斯丁), in his work The City of God (《上帝之城》), presents the theory of “two cities,” arguing that human history is ultimately a struggle between the City of God and the City of the Devil. On Earth, these two cities stand as polar opposites. Augustine notes that the core difference between the Devil’s City and the City of God lies in their common bond: in the former, people share a self-centered love; in the latter, they unite in their love of God, which in turn fosters mutual love. Under this framework, humanity either belongs to the City of God—apart from worldly politics and destined for heaven—or belongs to the City of the Devil, condemned after death. In Augustine’s view, the dual structure of the City of God and the earthly city forms the backbone of world history, leaving no room for a third city. Consequently, all earthly political and social systems belong to the worldly city and cannot, in any sense, be part of the City of God. In 1925, however, the German scholar Hans Leisegang (雷斯岗) posited that Augustine’s thought, in fact, allows for three cities: the heavenly City of God, the earthly City of God, and, strictly speaking, the earthly City of the Devil.
The “earthly City of God” is not constructed for its own sake; rather, it is built to symbolize the “heavenly City of God.” Such a city must be governed by a political order that fully embraces God’s design of absolute human equality. The earthly City of God—the “City of Humanity”—is the greatest gift God has bestowed upon humankind. Its core principle is that, in the eyes of God, all people are unequivocally equal. This “City of Humanity” consists of a population possessing rights of absolute equality, united by a sense of justice and shared interests under a social contract: in other words, a republican form of government.
Presently, there is no nation fully established on the principle of absolute equality before God. The United States exhibits some rudiments of an “earthly City of God,” but it remains far from embodying it entirely. As for certain countries calling themselves “People’s Republics,” they neither follow the principle that “people are created equal” nor the idea that “people are created absolutely equal.” In Augustine’s classification, they belong to the earthly “City of the Devil.”
This earthly City of God is neither the heavenly City of God nor the Devil’s city. Rather, it is a “City of Humanity” built on both worldly and universal values in accordance with God’s principle of creating all humans in absolute equality. The mainland scholar Zhang Qianfan (张千帆) questions the universality of “religious nation-building.” He notes that Spain and its former Latin American colonies were once uniformly Catholic and fervent in their faith, comparable to the early American Founders. Certain African and Middle Eastern nations are equally single-minded in their religious character—albeit with Islam—which can be as fervent as the American religious environment at its founding. Many of these countries count 90% or even 99% of their populations as religious adherents, yet they have struggled to establish stable governance. Is it merely because their faith is deemed “inferior,” “incorrect,” or insufficiently “conservative”? Zhang argues that regarding America’s founding as the unique case of a nation established by the “right” ideas and beliefs is, in fact, a fundamental misunderstanding of American constitutional history.
Zhang attempts to demonstrate, by citing various countries that have failed under religious rule, that one cannot forge a successful state solely through a “correct” set of doctrines and beliefs—a reading he contends misinterprets America’s core founding values. The United States was not founded as a theocracy but rather upon two axioms of political philosophy: that God created human beings as equals and endowed them with free will. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (美国宪法第一修正案) prohibits Congress from establishing any national religion or impeding religious practice, making the United States the first country whose constitution explicitly disallowed a state church while guaranteeing freedom of religion and speech. The U.S. was not established by any single creed—such as Protestantism. Therefore, the failures or inadequacies of other nations under religious rule cannot negate the fact that the United States was founded on two axiomatic beliefs in God, forming its core values.
Some scholars also claim that America is America because of the five inseparable pillars of civilization. Historians generally credit the establishment of America’s “City upon a Hill” to five urban civilizations: Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, London, and Philadelphia. Jerusalem provided faith in God as the bedrock of that City upon a Hill. Athens demonstrated the perils of democratic failure—its downfall at the hands of a less advanced Sparta underscores how technological, military, cultural, and economic might alone cannot guarantee success. America’s Founding Fathers painstakingly designed the new nation’s institutions to avoid the pitfalls of Athenian-style democracy. Rome contributed to America the most stable and enduring political structure in history—a bicameral republic. The Founders’ adoption of the Roman Republic was prudent: Greek-style democracy, with its endless internal friction, would have doomed this land of promise. London then offered a sophisticated model of modern English governance and maritime legal tradition. Finally, Philadelphia was the city of the Continental Congress, where spirited debates culminated in a distinctively American system, fusing these four cultural elements and steering the nation’s course.
America’s order is often viewed as the fruit of Europe’s Enlightenment, built upon the abstract principles of Enlightenment thinkers. Yet Russell Kirk argued otherwise. He believed that America’s order was not simply the rational kingdom that the Enlightenment philosophers had imagined but a timeless path embedded in the five millennia of human civilization. According to Kirk, these principles were long ago revealed to humankind through the Bible. The American Revolution, in his view, sought to establish a new order grounded in ancient truths and old principles. Though the United States seemed a fresh entity, it was actually not a break with the past. Rather, it inherited the grand tradition of human liberty. Those four cities—Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, and London—decided America’s destiny and set it apart from other nations. Liu Junning (刘军宁), summarizing Kirk’s viewpoint, states that America’s order is the culmination of humanity’s long and noble traditions. Jerusalem reveals the mysteries and principles of order, Athens contributes arts and sciences, Rome supplies governance and natural law, and London imparts the rule of law, language, customs, and the Anglo tradition. Without these legacies, America’s order would never have emerged.
Liu Junning thus concludes that the Founders were, at heart, conservatives. America’s order, in his eyes, is conservative in nature because the U.S. Constitution is conservative—carrying forward the finest traditions of humanity. Yet Liu overlooks the central role of liberalism in America’s political order. The American Revolution defended the inalienable rights to freedom and equality, rights endowed by God and self-evident. To preserve the eternal rights bestowed on humankind by God is, in essence, a conservative impulse. Of the five pillars undergirding America, the Constitution grants special primacy to unwavering faith in God and the three absolute individual rights arising from that faith. Characterizing American politics solely as conservative or liberal proves incomplete. America’s political order is, in reality, a melding of conservatism and liberalism. The Constitution inherits and reflects the traditions of English conservatism, while the Bill of Rights epitomizes the essence of liberalism. This dynamic balance between liberalism and conservatism underpins America’s stable and sustainable political order.
Subsequent personal rights amendments to the U.S. Constitution championed absolute, inalienable individual rights—those not restricted by the Constitution. Ratified in December 1791, the Ninth Amendment (美国宪法第九修正案) stipulates: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Running through the Ninth Amendment are two threads—“limiting federal power” and “protecting unenumerated individual rights”—that define the boundary of governmental authority and reinforce rights not explicitly listed in the Constitution. Observing the evolution of U.S. constitutional amendments, the scope of individual rights grows and expands over time. This includes the rights of Indigenous peoples, African Americans, women, and, more recently, LGBTQ+ individuals. Yet the Founders themselves viewed equality as relative rather than absolute—a vulnerability in America’s political and economic framework and a root cause of its enduring racial and social conflicts.
Only a nation built on the philosophy of absolute individual rights conferred by God can claim true justice. John Rawls (罗尔斯), in A Theory of Justice (《正义论》), articulates a universal perspective on individual rights: each person has an inviolability founded on justice that not even the welfare of society as a whole can override. Centering on personal rights, he constructs a broad, meticulously reasoned theory of social justice, offering a distinct and forceful justification for the constitutional and democratic values that underlie modern governance. Justice is to social institutions what truth is to a system of thought. It is the overarching goal of any social order, and one’s obligation to uphold that order presupposes that the order itself is just.
So, what kind of system truly embodies justice? Drawing on natural rights theory and the social contract tradition, Rawls advances the principles of liberty and equality and a difference principle as independent criteria for selecting, evaluating, and adjusting institutions. The first principle asserts the equality of individual freedom; the second emphasizes fair opportunities and safeguards for the least advantaged. Between them, Rawls proposes two sequential rules: the priority of liberty and the priority of justice over efficiency and welfare. Liberty, in this sense, is the supreme human value that must be preserved unconditionally. It cannot be traded or compromised for any reason, and any limitation on freedom is justified only by the defense of freedom itself. By enshrining the sacred, unassailable nature of individual liberty, this rule draws a clear line that the government must not cross lest it slip into criminality. Furthermore, the priority of justice over efficiency and welfare mandates fair distribution of opportunities, except where inequality benefits the worst-off. Nonetheless, Rawls’s conception of justice, anchored in natural rights, remains constrained if not founded on divine authority. Without God as the ultimate source, the standard for moral judgment is never absolute.
Absolute individual rights, granted by God, form the basis of relationships among individuals and between individuals and government through the act of “covenant-making.” If individuals do not covenant with God, any contract between humans may amount to a law of the jungle. Once individuals covenant with God through faith, they establish a government that likewise enters into a covenant with God. This concept of “covenant” is one of the most important genes of American political civilization. By rejecting the supreme authority of the Roman Church and acknowledging the God of the Bible in its place, the Puritans entered into a “covenant” with God, establishing a new society in the American colonies according to that covenant. First is the “Covenant of Grace,” a covenant of faith in which believers commit themselves to God, justified by faith. Second is the “Church Covenant,” where believers voluntarily unite to form independent churches, worship together, and lead Christian lives. Third is the “Civil Covenant,” which extends the concept of covenant into the earthly realm, forming governments to oversee secular matters. America’s 1787 Constitutional Convention was the direct and natural outcome of these three covenants—grace, church, and government—embraced by all.
This translation is authorized by the original author and undertaken by the China Thought Express editorial team. The original text can be found in the book, “ God, Faith, and Political Order” (上帝、信仰与政治制度， 博登书屋 2020年9月出版)
Kindly attribute the translation if referenced.