Natural Law

A - Aquinas’ Natural Law: laws and precepts as the basis of morality

Aquinas’ four levels of law (eternal, divine, natural and human); Natural Law derived from rational thought; based on a belief in a divine creator (the highest good as being the rational understanding of God's final purpose). Natural Law as a form of moral absolutism and a theory which has both deontological and teleological aspects. The five primary precepts (preservation of life, ordered society, worship of God, education and reproduction of the human species) as derived from rational thought and based on the premise of 'doing good and avoiding evil'; the secondary precepts which derive from the primary precepts; the importance of keeping the precepts in order to establish a right relationship with God and gain eternal life with God in heaven.

• The ideals behind Natural Law can be traced back to ancient philsophers such as aristotle.
• He thought that the teleological goal for man was to live a life of a certain kind: to be reasoning creatures and to use reason to recognise how to behave (i.e morally).
• It is when human beings act morally that their purpose of telos is fulfilled.
• Hence the combination of reason and moral action are in accordance with the natural order of things.
• Aristotle saw the goal (purpose) of human life as ‘eudaimonia’ (happiness). We pursue other goals to ultimately achieve happiness.
• Confusion can arise due to the modern version of the word ‘happiness’, as it can be associated with ‘pleasure’, but this is very different, as pleasure is just for ones gratification.
• In contrast, for Aristotle happiness is living well and being fulfilled, since it involved behaving rationally, such as being consistent with human nature and order of the natural world.
• He thought that making reasoned choices would lead to happiness.

• St Thomas Aquinas, an important Christian philosopher and theologian developed a fuller account of Natural Law in the thirteenth century.
• In his work, Summa Theologica, Aquinas described Natural Law as the moral code existing with the purpose of nature, created by God. This Natural Law exists to assist humans to direct their actions in such a way that they may reach eternal destiny with God.
• This divinely inspired law covers both the outward external view of actions and the internal motivation for doing so. NL evaluates both what you do and why you do it. Reason is the principle tool for making moral decisions.

• Aquinas agreed with Aristotle that everything in the world has a purpose, but argued that this purpose was given by God.
• He also incorporated into his Natural Law theory Aristotle’s ideas of the importance of cultivating the cardinal virtues; but for Aquinas this was in order to develop as a human being and to achieve one’s true nature in relation to God.
• For Aquinas, the Natural Law was created by God and designed to achieve the ultimate purpose - to enjoy fellowship with God and to be perfect in the image of God.
• Obeying Natural Law meant doing actions that develop our image to reflect as closely as possible to the image of God; however, true perfection of this was not possible in our lives on earth.
• For Aquinas, reason still played a key role in his development of Natural Law, despite its divine origin.
• God was seen as the source of NL, which was rooted in the human mind, and when reasoning about moral questions takes place, then good reasoning will coincide with the NL.
• He also saw the final purpose of human beings in terms of the eternal rather than the temporal.
  

• Absolutist: Aquinas' Natural Law theory can be considered absolutist. An absolutist believes that there are universal moral norms which can be applied to all situations and at all times. It is absolutist because it identifies the right action by the means of the primary precepts.
• Deontological: NL is also a deontological theory. Certain actions are intrinsically right or wrong regardless of the consequences of the action. It is deontological as what is needed to be done is seen as being determined by fundamental principles that are not based on the consequences.
• Teleological: NL is also seen to have teleological aspects. This is because in applying the predetermined absolute principles, the end result is considered. As ‘casuistry’ originates from the word ‘case’ it can suggest that the context and the ‘end’ results are considered and so the teleological aspect is NL is often accepted.
• Casuistry: The word ‘casuistry’ originates from the Latin word casus meaning case. Casuistry is when core principles of pre-determined moral behaviour are applied to a ‘case’, context or situation. Reason is used to apply the rule and determine judgement on the morality of the situation.

 Aquinas did not think that this perfection could be discovered by Natural Law alone. He also appealed to ‘eternal law’ and ‘divine law’.

Eternal Law

• We only know the EL in part since it refers to the principles by which God governs the universe.
• The EL is identical to the mind of God and so God only completely understands it and can access it.
• It is God's unchanging reason, and is perfect.
• Aquinas believed that EL is not like NL because it is in God and not a feature of our nature.
• The EL can be reflected in the Divine law.
• Although humans cannot fully know the EL, we can occassionally have a glimpse of it, for example through scientific knowledge of aspects of the natural world.

• The Divine Law refers to sacred text, i.e the Bible which guides us in reaching our goal of perfection. Can also be the teachings of the Church.
• However, although such revelation is aimed at correcting that which was impaired by the Fall of human beings, Aquinas believed that such perfection was not achievable in this life, but only after death.
• God’s will and wisdom is revealed to us through Divine Law.
• The Divine Law can only be acknowledged by those who believe in God, which is different to Natural Law as it can be viewed and interpreted by everyone, regardless of faith.
  

• Natural Law is the part of the Eternal Law that applies to human choices in identifying the primary precepts and can be known by our Natural reason.
• The innate human ability to know what is naturally right.
• Natural Law is within all of us but it is not like a physical law that has to be followed.
• It derives from reason and reason needs to be applied carefully and coherently in order to avoid an erroneous outcome.
• Everyone has a natural sense that ‘good is to be done and evil is to be avoided’ which some call human nature.
• All human beings are able to perceive the natural law, but only believers in God understand its eschatological implications.
  

• The customs and practices of any given society.
• It differs from natural law as natural law is universal and can be applied to everyone, but human law is exclusive to that society.
• Aquinas believed that human law is only a proper law if it is good and in accordance with divine law and natural law.
• Human law involves a recognition of a need to seek the common good by establishing custom and tradition of rules based in experienced judgements.
• Aquinas recognised that this level of law could sometimes involve wrong reasoning and lead to injustice, arguing ‘if any point it deflects from the law of nature, it is no longer a law but a perversion of law’.
  

Aquinas believed that the primary precepts apply to all human beings without exception. They are good acts because they lead us towards the main human purpose of goal. The most fundamental one that underpins them all is ‘act in such a way as to achieve good and avoid evil’ - this is the most basic natural inclination. From this Aquinas then identified more general inclinations or tendencies. In one sense they can be seen as fundamental principles that must be followed in order to achieve the required ends.

W   Worship God

O    Ordered Society

R     Reproduce

L     Learn (Educate children)

D    Defend the innocent  (or preserve innocent life)

Whether or not acts lead us towards God depends upon whether the action fits the purpose that humans were made for. If the action helps us to fulfil that purpose then it is good. The primary precepts therefore help us to identify what our God-given purposes are in life and therefore they identify which acts are ‘good’. If we fulfil these purposes then it will bring us closer to God and to our ultimate goal of re-establishing a ‘right’ relationship with God and by doing so, gain eternal life with God in heaven.

From the primary precepts, secondary ones can be deduced. The difference between the primary and secondary is that the primary precepts are always true and held universally, without exception, and are also self-evident. In contrast, the secondary precepts are not strictly universal since they may not hold in certain circumstances. They are also devised from reasoning from the primary precepts. An example of a secondary precept would be ‘do not steal’. This reflects the primary precept of ‘an ordered society’. However it is accepted that sometimes not following secondary precepts may be supported by another primary precept. For example, if the act of stealing was for a hungry child, then the primary precept of defending innocent life takes precedence. In such a case that act is justified. Natural Law always demands that a primary precept is adhered to. It is this sort of ‘working out’ that is casuistry. Its teleological influence can be seen here. 

One way that correct reasoning can be developed is through the cultivation of certain virtues. Aquinas identified three theological virtues (revealed in the Bible) that are known as the three revealed virtues; but actually referred to them as the ‘articles of faith’. They are the superlative virtues that define and direct all other virtues, and as they are superlative and absolute they are perfect. However, they are an aspiration in that they cannot be fully achieved in this world. It is with God’s grace through these virtues that enables a human being to strive towards perfection. 

Faith: This is more than just an intellectual acknowledgement of assent to the divine. Faith is an act of will for Aquinas, it is ‘an act of intellect which assents the divine truth at the command of the will, moved by God’s grace’. Faith involves the whole person and reflects a total outpouring and deference to the divine as an active assertion. 

Hope: Hope is the constant and consistent trust in achieving the beatific vision. This is like an inspired positive state of being, a spiritual energy that drives a person in pursuit of final end. It is a pure form of desire focused on the highest aim alone. It is an underlying virtue that supports the active participation in other non-theological, moral virtues. 

Love (charity): Love for God is reflected in the love for one’s neighbour and is the real key the Aquinas’ view of morality. Love is the one virtue that actively directs all other virtues towards God. As reflected in Corinthians, without love, all other virtues are ‘nothing’, meaningless and empty. Love also has the healing property that restores our ‘fallen’ nature. Although charity is the word often used in translation, it is derived from the Greek word for love – agape. This is often understood as pure, unconditional love as opposed to sexual, empathetic (usually associated with family love), and affection. ‘It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud’ (Corinthians). One vital aspect of love as a virtue is that in incorporates the ‘gift’ of wisdom, a virtue in itself. For Aquinas, wisdom was the insight in to the supernatural truths of creation, the goodness of God and the beatific vision; ‘the sovereign good, which is the last end’. Those who are wise have a comprehensive understanding of the goodness of God that can then direct others towards a virtuous life. The superlative virtue of love is the essence of all other virtues in that it directs them towards the correct end.

As well as the superlative revealed virtues, Aquinas identified some natural virtues. He argued that one way correct reasoning can be developed is through the cultivation of specific natural virtues and he identified four virtues as the most important of these. These are known as the cardinal virtues. For Aquinas these were the main framework for moral behaviour that helped human beings to become more God-like in their application. 

Prudence: This involves being able to make sound judgements in reasoning. It is the application of ‘wisdom concerning human affairs’ that is ‘right reason with respect to action’. Prudence involves being aware of both the moral principles established through Natural Law but also the specific situation wherein such principles need to be applied. In effect, prudence is the basis of casuistic endeavour. It is the capability and competency of rational evaluation of circumstances in order to establish direct true and good courses of action. It does this in three steps: counsel, a consideration of possible courses of action; judgement, deciding upon the correct course of action; and command, which is the application of that judgement. This is the art of casuistry. Aquinas relates prudence to other virtues that depend upon it including memory, intelligence, reason, foresight, circumspection and caution. 

• Temperance: This virtue is all about moderation, involving sobriety and restraint. Temperance has the ability to purify and refine physical pleasures. Part of it is also the virtue of humility, of knowing how to present oneself in the correct and balanced manner. Meekness, generosity and studiousness are also part of temperance as they restrain such vices as anger and vanity. 
• Fortitude: Also referred to as courage, it incorporates discipline, patience, endurance and perseverance in the face of difficult circumstances. These could be physical, moral or spiritual. A courageous person will not be beaten or broken by stress or sorrow. Courage also encourages nobility of character and one that is not controlled by feat on the one hand, yet on the other hand not subject to reckless, irresponsible or rash behaviour. 
• Justice: Whilst the first three virtues are to do with individual qualities, the last cardinal virtue has a specific focus on others, that is, our actions towards them. It is less to do with our own character but more to do with how our actions are governed. Justice covers the law, both general as regards community welfare and also individual cases. It also involves the specific way in which matters are administered, both in terms of goods and responsibilities, which, according to Aquinas, are ‘[fairly] appointed among people who stand in a social community’ and in ‘due proportion’. His idea of justice does not mean equality for all, but recognises individual needs, relative to circumstances and needs. For example, someone in poverty requires more assistance from justice than a wealthy person.

Natural Law is within all of us but it is not like a physical law which can be followed. It derives from reason but sometimes the reasoning can be incorrectly directed or applied. Aquinas understands the attraction of Utilitarian thinking – condoms could be very useful to prevent the spread of AIDS, and divorce may seem a practical solution when marriage has broken down. However, things like pleasure in these cases are only apparent goods: they do not actually help us fulfil our God-given purpose. Real goods are in line with our telos, and help towards the primary precepts. Helping someone have painless death may seem compassionate, but it stops that person from fulfilling their purpose as a human. The last weeks of life can be a very important time when we come to terms with our own mortality. Pain relief through euthanasia is an apparent good. Another example of an apparent good would be following the desires for something that seems good at the time but not in line with our good overall in relation to Natural Law such as eating as much as possible because the food tastes good. This shows a lack of the cardinal virtue of temperance and cultivates a greedy character. Therefore, Aquinas did not believe that people choose to be ‘evil’ but rather they performed evil acts because they used their ability to reason incorrectly. 

Real good: A characteristic that will help people to become closer to the ideal human nature that God had planned for us.

Apparent good: A vice or sin that takes us further away from the ideal human nature that God had planned for us.

External Act: An action that is seen to be good or bad but one that does not correlate with, nor is consistent with, the intention behind it. 

Internal Act: An action that is consistent with intention whether good or bad. 

Aquinas made a distinction between the intention of an act and the act itself. For those looking on, it may well be judged that an action was good. However, if the onlooker knew the real motive or intention, then it may be seen rather differently. Likewise it is not acceptable to do a bad act intentionally even if the aim is to bring about good outcomes. This approach to understanding intentions is important when applying NL to moral dilemmas. It is at the heart of what is known as the ‘doctrine of double effect’. This states that even if a good act results in bad consequences, then it is still right to do that act. It is still right to do that act, even if it was known that bad consequences would result. The important issue is the intention. If the intention was not to bring about these bad consequences, then the unfortunate side effects do not make the act morally wrong.

Classical formulations of the principle of double effect require that four conditions need to be met if the action is to be morally permissible:

• That we do not wish the evil effects, and make all reasonable efforts to avoid them;
• That the immediate effect be good in itself;
• That the evil is not made a means to obtain the good effect. 
• That the good effect be as important (proportionate) at least as the evil effect.

Natural Law would include euthanasia and abortion in this category. If you help someone have an abortion, this could be done with the very best intentions. However, Aquinas would still say that it is a bad act, as the exterior act (what you actually do) is wrong, even though the intention (interior act) was good. For an action to be right there needs to be a good intention and the act itself must be right. For example, soldiers may fight to defend someone under attack, so their exterior actions are good, but if they attack the enemy with hatred and a thirst for revenge in their hearts, their interior acts are wrong even if their exterior acts are good. 

• Natural Law reveals a universal law, and therefore is not relative to culture or a religion. This means that the primary precepts are common to all. Because it is about following natural inclinations, then the application to a moral issue is always the same, wherever you are and whoever you are. The idea of common nature and morality for all people gives NL a universality that goes beyond any one religion or culture. This is attractive in a world that suffers from intercultural strife and disharmony. Different cultures can all be seen to have the same basic principles (primary precepts).  

• Natural Law judges the intrinsic value of actions regardless of outcomes - it is the action itself - not the outcomes, that decides whether an act is moral. This avoids the problem of seemingly doing an action that appears good but in fact has evil motives. In such cases the theory does not identify those acts as good. This seems a correct judgement.

• Absolutist approach determines that some actions are always right or always wrong. This provides people with clear cut consistent rules. Enables people to be able to establish common rules in order to structure communities.

• NL echoes the Ten Commandments such as ‘do not kill’, and is still used by the Roman Catholic Church, the largest Christian denomination in the world. The pope criticised relativist theories as ‘moving towards a dictatorship of relativism’ where an individual only looks out for themselves. In contrast, NL is based on goodness for all of humanity. It promotes precepts such as an ‘ordered society’. Also promotes the Golden Rule of Christianity through cardinal virtues such as justice.

• Has the attraction and strength of that it is based on what it means to be human. To be human means acting in line with your true nature and following our natural inclinations. When the theory is applied, assumes the special status of humans

• In his article, ‘An examination of the Thomistic theory of natural moral law’, Kai Neilson argues against Aquinas’ belief in a basic human nature that is present across all societies and cultures ‘there is no such thing as an essential human nature which a man man. The concept of human nature is a rather a vague cultural concept; it is not a scientific one’. The challenge is that an essential human nature isn't as obviously self-evident as Aquinas claims. Neilson notes that anthropologists have investigate practices in other cultures. At one time, Eskimos killed members of their families who would not make it through the winter, and newborn girls if there were no husbands to support them. Scandinavians killed their elderly family members to allow them into Valhalla. These differing moral standards challenge the idea of a common natural law within all human societies. Natural Law obscures these basic moral differences.

• Aquinas’ Natural moral law is a Christian ethic and yet Jesus opposes legalistic morality in the New Testament. Jesus debated sharply with the moral legalists of his time, the Pharisees. Natural moral law appears to be similar to the Pharisaic law, and some, such as Joseph Fletcher argue that Jesus rejected this approach. Fletcher would also argue that following situation ethics and agape love is a more reasonable approach.
• Idealistic - Aquinas says that humans have a "tendency to do good and avoid evil", but do we? This is perhaps too general and idealistic.
• No Single Human Nature - we are all different. We have different lifestyles and opinions, but Aquinas is having none of that. He seems to presume that we are inherently all the same and fit under the bracket of one human nature. This presents the theory as partially inflexible. Homosexuality will be persecuted under NL because it doesn't seek to reproduce - we do not fit under the same umbrella.

• Immoral Outcomes - Natural Law could result in poor outcomes if the primary precepts are rigidly adhered toin terms of sexual ethics, Natural Law would rule out contraception - the removal of contraception in many strictly religious countries has already led to more and more cases of AIDS across the globe. 
• Outdated - the theory is arguably based on outdated social norms and is not relevant to modern society. In terms of sexual ethics, it is not socially acceptable to suggest that homosexuality is immoral. Furthermore, society has moved on since Aquinas's time; sex for pleasure is just part of our society - it's not necessarily moral, it's just different to what Aquinas would've liked to see.