The subtitle of this highly interesting book accurately captures its contents.Part 1 presents the theological foundations of the argument, which are based on the freshly coined concept of 'unoriginal sin' and then explores repentance as the work of responsibility and repair.In part 2, several 'case studies' are presented across three concerns.These concerns are the 'wicked problems' of the subtitle: 'environmental injustice, the exploitation of globalisation, and health disparities' (p.113).Climate change is also discussed in part 1 as a wicked problem (p.16).The interpretive contribution of the neologism 'unoriginal' is also clear: 'unoriginal sin makes us complicit in the harms they sc.wicked problems cause ' (p.113).From such a position, the theme of repentance emerges and leads to the recognition of responsibility and to the work of repair.In other words, the crucial point is that unoriginal sin directs us to the identification and acknowledgement of complicity: our individual actions are 'enmeshed in structures' (p.3).The argument thereby seeks to develop a 'robust theology of sin and repentance that should help us understand our own involvement in harmful systems, demonstrate how we can take responsibility for the harms, and help us discern what we must do to repair those harms' (p. 7).Unoriginal sin is, in Rebecca Copeland's presentation, critical and diagnostic.The term 'unoriginal' is proposed as an advance on the term 'original' and seeks to distinguish itself from the older term.Copeland's argument thus has the task of showing how 'unoriginal' is itself an act of theological repair.For example, 'original' has the merit of directing our attention to sin that originatesin other words, sin has a beginning and, we might hope, an end.Unoriginal in Copeland's argument does not, I think, deny thisand the new coinage also has the capacity to stress the perdurance of sin: that sinning is inescapable.This is a welcome emphasis, and some contemporary readings of original sin also stress this aspect.In addition, arguing for unoriginal sin as meaning that sin is 'not inherent or inevitable' and 'does not lie at the foundation of human nature' (p.8) overlaps with one (narrative) reading of original sin: inescapable but not necessary, fundamental but not foundational.Copeland also proposes the rejection of 'congenital' as a basis for unoriginal sin, and this is in line with some contemporary reconstructions of original sin.
Peter Scott (Fri,) studied this question.