Brownson on the Natural Law-The Law as Ligament

IN THIS SHORT PARAGRAPH, Brownson rejects those who would deny a telos or teleology in the natural law, which is nothing other than the expression of the Eternal Law with respect to man, and thus whose final cause is God. He also rejects the Kantian notion of autonomy, and establishes morality by linking it to our submission and obedience to God as our Alpha and our Omega, our beginning and our end.



"Man before God as final cause has no more autonomy than he has before God as first cause, that is to say, none at all. He has before God, then, no rights, no independence, but is bound to absolute submission to his law. The law is the copula, the ligament that binds man to his final end, or supreme good, and is in the second cosmic cycle what the creative act is the first; that is, the law in the order of palingenesis* is what the creative act is in the order of genesis. As there is no physical cosmos save mediante the law of God, so is there no moral cosmos save mediante the law of God. As all physical existence is from God as first cause, mediante creation, so all moral existence is from God as final cause, mediante obedience to his law. Without seeking God as final cause, as his law commands, there is no proper morality, any more than there is or can be holy living, or supernatural sanctity."

[From Brownson's Works, "Vincenzo Gioberti" (H. F. Brownson: Detroit, 1898), Vol. 2, p. 127-28.]

*The term palingenesis or rather palingenesia is derived from Greek "palin" (which means again) and genesis (birth, becoming). Thus it may be translated by the term rebirth, regeneration, or even restoration. Conceptually, the term was used by the Stoics whose doctrine taught that the universe or cosmos was constantly being re-created by the Demiurge. The term was used by the Jewish philosopher Philo to refer to Noah and his progeny as the group that would renovate or give rebirth to humanity. The term is used by Plutarch, as it was by the Pythagoreans, to refer to metempsychosis or rebirth of souls in new bodies (as part of his belief in re-incarnation).

The term is used by Jesus in the New Testament, specifically in the Gospel of Matthew: "And Jesus said to them: Amen, I say to you, that you, who have followed me, in the regeneration (παλιγγενεσία), when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (Matt. 19:28 Douay Rheims). It is also used in Titus 3:5 to refer to the rebirth of a Christian in Christ. As used in the New Testament, the term does not bear any of its Pythagorean connotations of re-incarnation or metempsychosis.

Universal Ethic-Convergences 1-Hindu Traditions

Chapter I: Convergences

1.1. The Wisdom and Religions of the World

12. In different cultures, men have progressively elaborated and developed traditions of wisdom in which they express and transmit their vision of the world, and also their perception reflecting the place that human beings occupy in society and in the cosmos. At the forefront of all these conceptual theoretizations, these wisdoms--often of religious nature--transmit an experience that identifies that which helps and that which hinders the full development of one’s personal life and happy advancement of social life. These constitute a sort of "cultural capital" available in the search for a common wisdom necessary to answer contemporary ethical challenges. According to the Christian faith, these traditions of wisdom, notwithstanding their limits and sometimes their errors, display a reflection of the divine wisdom which operates in the hearts of men. They deserve attention and respect, and they are able to have great value as preparations for the reception of the Gospel.

The shape and the extent of these traditions can vary considerably. Nevertheless, they are testimony of the existence of a patrimony of common moral values shared among all men, however may be the way in which such values are justified within any particular vision of the world. For example, the “golden rule” ("Do not do to others what you do not want done to you" [Tobit 4:15]) is found, in one form or another, in the greater part of the wisdom traditions.(7) In addition, there is general agreement that recognizes that the great moral norms not only apply to a specific human group, but apply universally to every individual and to all peoples. Finally, many traditions recognize that these universal moral behaviors are demands that stem from the nature of the human being: they express the manner in which man should insert himself, in a creative and also harmonious way, into a cosmic or metaphysical order which is greater than he is, and which provides meaning to his life. In fact, this order is seen as impregnated with an immanent wisdom. It is the bearer of a moral message that men are in a position to discover.


13. In the Hindu traditions the world—the cosmos, like human society—is regulated by an order or a fundamental law (dharma) which is necessary to respect so as not to provoke serious imbalances. It is in this manner that dharma defines the socio-religious obligations of man. Specifically, the moral teaching of Hinduism is to be found in light of the fundamental doctrines of the Upanishads: the belief in an indefinite cycle of transmigration (samsāra), with the idea that good or bad actions done in the present life (karma) have influence on successive lives. Such doctrines have important effects on the behavior towards others: they imply one should have a high degree of goodness and of tolerance, a sense of disinterested action to the benefit of another, as well as the practice of non-violence (ahimsā). The main current of Hinduism distinguishes two bodies of texts: Šruti ("that which is understood," that is to say, revelation) and smrti ("what is remembered," that is to say, tradition). The ethical prescriptions find themselves above all in the smrti, most particularly in the dharmaśāstra (the most important of which are the mānava dharmaśāstra or the Laws of Manu, dated 200-100 B.C.). Besides this basic principle, according to which "the immemorial custom is the transcendent law approved from the sacred writings and from the codes of the divine legislators; so every man of the three main classes that respects the supreme spirit that is in him, should always conform himself diligently to the immemorial custom,"(8) is found a practical equivalent to the golden rule. "I will say this to you, that this is the essence of the greatest good of the human being. The man who puts into practice the religion (dharma) of universal non-harm (ahimsā) gains the greatest Good. That man who is dominated by three passions--lust, anger and greed--who is able to renounce them in relation to his being, acquires success. ... That man who considers all creatures the same as himself, who treats them as if they were his very self, and he who disposes of the punitive rod and dominates completely his anger, the possession of happiness will be assured him. ... He will not do to another what he considers harmful for himself. This is the sum of the rule of virtue. ... Neither the fact of refusing or giving, in plenty and in unhappiness, in the agreeable and in the disagreeable, he will adjudge all the consequence as if the other was his proper self.”(9) Diverse precepts of the Hindu tradition parallel the requirements of the Decalogue.(10)



(7) Cf. St. Augustine, De doctrina christiana, III, XIV, 22 (Corpus christianorum, series latina, 32, 91): "The precept: 'Do not unto others that which you do not want done to you,' cannot in any manner vary as a function of the diversity of persons." ("Quod tibi fieri non vis, alii ne feceris”, nullo modo posse ulla eorum gentili diversitate variari."). Cf. Die «Goldene Regel» religionsgeschichtlich Untersucht, Leipzig, 1929; A. Dihle, Die Goldene Regel. Eine Einführung in die Geschichte der antiken und frühchristlichen Vulgarethik, Göttingen, 1962; J. Wattles, The Golden Rule, New York - Oxford, 1996.

(8) Mānava dharmaśāstra, 1, 108 (G. C. Haughton, Mānava Dharma Śāstra or The Institutes of Manu, Comprising the Indian System of Duties, Religious and Civil, ed., by P. Percival, New Delhi, 1982(4), 14.

(9) Mahābhārata, Anusasana parva, 113, 3-9 (ed. Ishwar Chundra Sharma and O. N. Bimali; transl. according to M. N. Dutt, vol. IX, Delhi, Parimal Publications, 469).

(10) For example: "Tell the truth, to say things that are pleasing, not to declare a disagreeable truth, and not to pronounce a compassionate lie: this is the eternal law." (Mānava dharmaśāstra, 4, 138, p. 101); "Consider always the action of striking, of injuring, and of killing the good of one's neighbor as the three most fatal things in the series of the vices provoked by anger." (Mānava dharmaśāstra, 7, 51, p. 156).

Universal Ethic-Introduction 3

10. It is true that the expression "natural law" has been the source of a many misunderstandings in actual practice. At times, the term is used to refer to the simple submission and passive resignation to the physical laws of nature, while human beings, justly, seek rather to dominate and orient these fixed and determined laws for their own benefit. At times, it is presented as an objective fact which is imposed from the outside upon one’s personal conscience, independently from the work of the reason and of subjectivity, and so is suspected of introducing an insupportable type of heteronomy to the dignity of the free human person. At other times, in the course of its history, Christian theology has equated natural law positions with anthropological viewpoints that subsequently have shown themselves to have been culturally and historically conditioned. But a deeper understanding of the relations between the moral subject, nature, and God, along with a better appreciation of the historicity that pertains the concrete applications of the natural law, come together to dissipate such misunderstandings. Today it is also important to propose the traditional doctrine of the natural law in terms that better manifest the personal and existential dimensions of the moral life. It is necessary also to insist more significantly the fact that the expression of the requirements of the natural law are inseparable from the effort of the entire human community to overcome selfish and factious tendencies, and to develop a global approach with an “ecology of the values,” without which human life risks the loss of authentic integrity and the appropriate sense of responsibility for the well-being of all.

11. The idea of the natural moral law assumes numerous common elements of the great religious and philosophical wisdom of humanity. So Chapter 1 of this document begins with the recalling of such “convergences.” Without any claim to be exhaustive, it indicates that this great religious and philosophical wisdom is testimony of the existence of a moral patrimony, widely held in common, that forms the basis of every dialogue on moral matters. Even more, they suggest, in one way or another, that this patrimony expresses a universal ethical message immanent in the nature of things which men are in a position to decipher. The document then recalls some essential points of reference of the historical development of the idea of the natural law, and cites some modern theories of morality which are partially at the origin of the contemporary difficulties in accepting such a notion. In Chapter 2 ("The perception of common moral values"), our document describes how, taking leave from the simplest data of moral experience, the human person arrives immediately at some fundamental moral goods, and is able to form as a consequence precepts of the natural law. These do not constitute a complete code of untouchable prescriptions, but provide permanent and normative principles that inspire and are at the service of the concrete moral life of persons. Chapter 3 ("The foundations of the natural law"), passing from the common experience to theory, deepens the philosophical, metaphysical, and religious foundations of the natural law. It aims at answering some contemporary objections, in particular with respect to the role of nature in personal acts, and answering questions regarding the possibility of nature providing a moral rule. Chapter 4 ("The natural law and the State") explains the guiding role of the precepts of the natural law in political life. The doctrine of natural law possesses already coherence and validity on the philosophical plane of reason which is common to all men, but Chapter 5 ("Jesus Christ, completion of the natural law") demonstrates that the natural law gains its fullest sense within salvation history. In fact, Jesus Christ, sent by the Father, is, with his Spirit, the fullness of all law.

Universal Ethic-Introduction 2

6. To explain the ethical foundation of the rights of the man, some, through the effort of dialogue between cultures and religions, have endeavored to formulate a "world ethic." The "world ethic" touts an ensemble of fundamental and obligatory values that for centuries have formed the treasury of human experience. These are found in all the great religious and philosophical traditions.(5) Such a worthwhile endeavor is an expression of the current need of an ethic that has universal and global validity. But can this purely inductive sort of search for a minimal consensus already existing, based upon a parliamentary model, satisfy the requirements for rights based on an absolute basis? Besides, doesn’t such a minimal ethic lead perhaps to the relativization of the strong ethical exigence one finds in every religion or particular wisdom?

7. For many decades the question of the ethical foundations of rights and of politics was put aside in some areas of the contemporary culture. Based upon the pretext that every demand for an objective and universal truth has been the source of intolerance and of violence, and that only relativism is able to safeguard pluralism of values and democracy, legal positivism, which refuses to refer to an objective and ontological criterion of what is just, has defended itself. From its perspective, the determinant of the right and of moral norms is the law then in place, which is considered right by definition since it is the expression of the will of the lawgiver. But the result of this is to open the road to the will of power, to the dictatorship of the arithmetic majority, and to ideological manipulation, all to detriment of the common good. "In ethics and in the present philosophy of right, the claims of legal positivism are largely present. The result is that legislation often becomes only a compromise between different interests; it tends to transform itself into the right of interests or private desires which oppose themselves to being derived from social responsibility."(6) But legal positivism is notoriously insufficient, since the legislator can work legitimately only within the specific limits that are derived from the dignity of the human person and to the service of the development of what is authentically human. Now, the legislator cannot leave the determination of what is human to extrinsic and superficial criteria, as it would do if, for example, it legitimized all that is feasible in the field of biotechnology. In short, the legislator should perform its task in an ethically responsible manner. Politics cannot ignore the ethical; nor can the the civil law and the legal order ignore the existence of a superior moral law.

8. In such context, in which the reference to objective values absolute and universally recognized became problematic, some, desiring to provide a rational base to common ethical decisions, have recommended an "ethics of conversation" along the lines of an understanding moral "dialogue." The ethics of this conversation consists in the use, during the course of any ethical debate, of only the rules able to be agreed to by all of the interested parties, and it requires the renouncing of any “strategic” behaviors designed to impose an actual point of view. In this fashion, the participants are able to determine if a rule of conduct, and of action, or a behavior is moral, since, leaving aside the cultural and historical contingencies, the principles of this ethical conversation offer a guarantee of universality and of rationality. The ethic of the conversation is interested above all in the methodology with which, through the means of this conversation, the principles and the ethical rules are able to be put to the test and to become obligatory for all of the participants. It is essentially a procedure to test the value of any proposed norms, but it cannot produce new substantial content. The ethic of the discussion is therefore a purely formal ethic, one than does not reach basic moral foundations. It runs also the risk of limiting itself to a search for compromise. Certainly, conversation and debate are always necessary to obtain a a workable accord on the concrete application of the moral rules in a given situation, but not at the expense of casting out moral conscience. A true discussion is not a substitute for personal moral convictions, but supposes them and enriches them.

9. Aware of the present state of affairs, in this document we intend to invite all those who question the basic foundations of ethics, as well as those of the legal and political order, to consider the resources that may be contained in a renewed presentation of the doctrine of the natural law. This doctrine affirms in substance that the persons and the human community are capable, with the light of reason, of recognizing the fundamental orientation of a moral act, as one which conforms to the very nature of the human subject, and one which is able to express it in normative manner in the form of precepts or of commandments. Such fundamental precepts, objective and universal, are considered to be the base and foundation of all subsequent moral determinations, legal and political, that regulate the life of the men and of the society. These constitute themselves as a permanent critical standard, and ensure the dignity of the human person confronting the fluctuation of ideology. In the course of history, in the elaboration of its own ethical tradition, the Christian community, guided by the Spirit of Jesus Christ and in critical dialogue with the traditions of wisdom which it has encountered, has proposed, refined and developed the teachings on the natural law so as to make it its fundamental ethical standard. But Christianity does not have a monopoly on the natural law. In fact, given that it is based on on the common reason of all of human beings, it is the basis of collaboration between all of the men of good will, regardless of their religious convictions.

(5) In 1993, some representatives of the Parliament of the Religions of the World proposed a public Declaration for a Global Ethic, that affirms that there "exists already between the religions a a consensus capable of founding a global ethic; a minimal consensus that pertains obligatory values, irrevocable norms, and essential moral tendencies." This Declaration contains four principles: 1) "No new world order without world ethics," 2) "Every human person is to be treated humanely." The principle behind the consideration of human dignity is that each human being is to be considered as an end in itself. Such a principle is a re-presentation of the "golden rule" that is present many religious traditions. 3) The Declaration formulates four irrevocable moral directives: non-violence and respect for life; solidarity; tolerance and truth; equality of man and woman. 4) With respect to the problems of humanity, a change in mentality is necessary, so that each person take conscience of the actual urgent responsibility. It is it up to the religions to cultivate such responsibility, to deepen it, and to transmit it to the future generations.
(6) Benedict XVI, Speech of February 12, 2007, to the International Congress Regarding the Natural Moral Law, Organized by the Pontifical Lateran University, in AAS 99 (2007) 244.

Universal Ethic-Introduction 1

As related in an earlier post, the International Theological Commission recently published its report, Searching for a Universal Ethic: A New Look at the Natural Law. The report may be found in French and Italian on the Holy See's web cite. Unfortunately, as far as I know, no plans exist to translate it into English. From time to time, I thought I would post translations of the Italian text into English. Be forewarned that the translation is not official, and my Italian translation skills are far from perfect.

International Theological Commission

SEARCHING FOR A UNIVERSAL ETHIC:
A NEW LOOK AT THE NATURAL LAW

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Chapter 1: Convergences

1.1 The wisdom of the religions of the world
1.2 The Graeco-Roman sources of the natural law
1.3 The teaching of Sacred Scripture
1.4 The development of the Christian tradition
1.5 Further evolution
1.6 The teaching of the Church and the natural law

Chapter 2: The Perception of Moral Values

2.1 The role of society and of culture
2.2 The moral experience: "It is necessary to do good."
2.3 The discovery of the precepts of the natural law: universality of the natural law
2.4 The precepts of the natural law
2.5 The application of the common precepts: history of the natural law
2.6 The moral dispositions of the person and his concrete acts

Chapter 3: The Foundation of the Natural Law

3.1 From experience to theory
3.2 Nature, person, and freedom
3.3 Nature, man, and God: from harmony to conflict
3.4 Ways toward a reconciliation

Chapter 4: The Natural Law and the State

4.1 The person and the common good
4.2 The natural law, measure of the political order
4.3 From natural law to natural right
4.4 Natural right and positive right
4.5 The political order and the eschatological order
4.6 The political order is a temporal and rational order

Chapter 5: Jesus Christ, the Completion of the Natural Law

5.1 The "Logos" Incarnate, The Living Law
5.2 The Holy Spirit and the New Law of Freedom


Conclusion

INTRODUCTION

1. Do moral objective values exist which unite mankind and offer it peace and happiness? What are they? How do we recognize them? How are they realized in the life of persons and in their life in common? These ever-present questions about right and wrong are more urgent than ever today in light of the fact that man has become more aware that he is part of a global community. Today, the great problems confronting human beings have international and global dimensions that arise from the development of the technologies of communication which allow for an increasing interaction between the persons, societies, and cultures. A local event can have a global repercussion almost immediately. For that reason, there has emerged an awareness of a global solidarity that finds its basic foundation in the unity of the mankind. This awareness translates itself to a sense of global responsibility. So the problems of the ecological balance, of the protection of the environment, of resources, and of climate present urgent concerns that raise questions that impact all of humanity, and whose solutions reach across national interests. Additionally, the threats presented by terrorism, organized crime, and other new forms of violence and of oppression weigh heavily on society and bring with them a global dimension. The rapid development of biotechnology, that at times threaten the very identity of the human being (e.g., genetic manipulation, cloning), urgently demands an ethical and political reflection of universal breadth. It is in such contexts that the search for common ethical values is actually being raised.

2. In their wisdom, through their generosity and sometimes by their heroism, men and women are living witnesses of such common ethical values. The deep admiration these persons engender in us is a first spontaneous sign of the existence of moral values. The reflection of academics and of scientists on the cultural, political, economical, moral, and religious dimensions of our social existence nourishes such belief in the common good of humanity. There are also artists that, in their presentation of beauty, react against the loss of this sense and renew the hope of human beings. Additionally, politicians work with both energy and creativity to carry out programs to eradicate poverty and to protect fundamental freedoms. In addition to these, one must add the very important and constant testimony of the representatives of religious and spiritual traditions which seek to live in the light of the ultimate truth and of the absolute good. All these contribute, each in its manner and in a reciprocal exchange, to promote peace, a more just political order, the sense of common responsibility, a fair distribution of wealth, respect for the environment, and the dignity of the human person and his or her fundamental rights. Nevertheless, these forces can only be successful as long their good intentions are based on a valid fundamental understanding regarding the goods and values that represent the deeper aspirations of the human being, both individual and public. Only the recognition and the promotion of these ethical values can contribute to the construction of a more human world.

3. The search for this common ethical language is a task for all men and women. For Christians, this task accords mysteriously with the work of the Word of God, "the true light, that illuminates every man" (John 1:9), and with the work of the Holy Spirit which causes to be born in human hearts "love, delight, calm, magnanimity, benevolence, goodness, faithfulness, mildness, self-dominion" (Gal 5:22-23). The Christian community, which shares "the joy and hope, the sorrow and anguish of the contemporary man" and "so feels itself really and intimately in solidarity with all mankind and with its history,"(1) is not able to support such common responsibility alone. Enlightened by the Gospel, pledged to engage in patient and respectful dialogue with all men of good will, Christians participate in the common search and promotion of human values: "What it is true, noble, just, pure, lovable, honored, what is virtuous, and what deserves praise, this should be the object of your thoughts." (Phil 4:8). They know that Jesus Christ, "our peace" (Eph. 2:14), who reconciled all men to God by means of the cross, is the deepest principal of unity toward which mankind is called to converge.

4. The search for a common ethical language is inseparable from an experience of conversion, wherein persons and communities must remove themselves from the forces that want to imprison human beings in indifference or push to raise walls between them or against the foreigner. The hard heart—cold, inert, and indifferent to one's neighbor and to mankind—must transform itself, under the action of the Spirit, to a heart of flesh,(2) sensitive to the call of wisdom, to empathy, to a desire for peace and hope for all. This conversion is the condition of a true dialogue.

5. There are no lack of contemporary efforts to define a universal ethic. After the end of World War II, the community of the nations, witnessing the results of the closely-bound relationship between totalitarianism and pure legal positivism, declared in the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man (1948) some inalienable rights of the human person that transcend the positive laws of the States and should serve as their reference and norm. Such rights are not simply legislative grants conceded by the law-making authority: these rights, that is to say their objective existence, were declared to exist prior to any legislative authority, and were therefore manifest. They are derived in fact precisely from the "recognition of the inherent dignity of every member of the human family." (Preamble).

The Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man constitutes one of the more happy successes in modern history. It "remains one of the highest expressions of the human conscience",(3) and offers a solid base for the promotion of a more just world. Nevertheless, the results have not always reached hopes’ height. Some countries have disputed the universality of such rights, have judged them too Western, and these push for a more inclusive formulation. Others nations have exhibited a certain inclination to multiply the rights of the man, more as a function of the disorderly desires of the individual consumer or claims of a certain group, and not the objective requirements of the common good of humanity, and have therefore served to devalue them. Separated from the moral sense of values that transcend special interests, the multiplication of procedural and substantive juridical regulations leads only to a hollowing out of those rights, and in effect only serves the interest of the stronger. Above all, it reflects itself in a tendency to reinterpret the rights of the man by separating them from dimension of ethics and of reason, which constitutes both their foundation and their end, and so results in the benefit of a pure legal utilitarianism.(4)


(1) Vatican II, Pastoral constitution Gaudium et spes, intro. n. 1
(2) Cf. Ezechiel 36:26
(3) John Paul II, Speech of October 5, 1995, to the General Meeting of the United Nations on the Celebration of the 50th Anniversary of its Foundation, in Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, XVIII/2, 1995, Città del Vaticano, 1998, 732.
(4) Cf. Benedict XVI, Speech of April 18, 2008, Before the General Meeting of the United Nations, AAS 100 (2008) 335: "The merit of the Universal Declaration is that it has enabled different cultures, juridical expressions and institutional models to converge around a fundamental nucleus of values, and hence of rights. Today, though, efforts need to be redoubled in the face of pressure to reinterpret the foundations of the Declaration and to compromise its inner unity so as to facilitate a move away from the protection of human dignity towards the satisfaction of simple interests, often particular interests. . . . Experience shows that legality often prevails over justice when the insistence upon rights makes them appear as the exclusive result of legislative enactments or normative decisions taken by the various agencies of those in power. When presented purely in terms of legality, rights risk becoming weak propositions divorced from the ethical and rational dimension which is their foundation and their goal. The Universal Declaration, rather, has reinforced the conviction that respect for human rights is principally rooted in unchanging justice, on which the binding force of international proclamations is also based. This aspect is often overlooked when the attempt is made to deprive rights of their true function in the name of a narrowly utilitarian perspective."

Natural Law: Ecstasis and Telos

ETIAMSI DAREMUS . . . NON ESSE DEUM. These temerarious but still tenuously introduced words in the introduction (Prolegomena) of Hugo Grotius's treatise De iure belli ac pacis (1625) symbolize a historical phenomenon of which anyone who studies the Natural Law must be aware. In this treatise on international relations, Grotius (1583-1645), commonly called the "Father of International Law" (although the title could equally be claimed by the Spaniard and Catholic Vittoria), relied on the doctrine of the Natural Law. Though the Dutch Grotius was himself a Christian [of Protestant bent, he wrote an apologetic of Christianity in Dutch, Vewisjs van den waren Godsdienst (1622) which was translated into Latin as De veritate religionis Christianae (1627)], he argued that the Natural Law would bind us etiamsi daremus . . . non esse Deum, even if "we dare to say there is no God." It is true that the Natural Law binds all men, including the Atheist, and if understood in this manner, there is no controversy to what was said. But Grotius's etiamsi is indicative of something in the air a little more subtle, and a little more ominous. It is perhaps the first shoot, the first flowering of a Natural Law theory wholly unmoored from the notion of God, if such a theory is even tenable. It was the maturation of trend of turning away from God being the measure of all things to a Protagorean man is the measure of all things. In his classic The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1988), the historian of Natural Law, Henrich Rommen, identifies Grotius as the "turning point." The "turn," however, started much earlier than Grotius.


In his excellent book Biblical Natural Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), Matthew Levering, an Associate Professor of Theology at Ave Maria University, discusses this "turn" from a theocentric notion of Natural Law to an anthropocentric notion of Natural Law. According to Matthew Levering, two things are required for a wholesome (and also Biblical, i.e., consistent with Revelation) theory of Natural Law. The first he calls ecstasis. The second he calls teleology.

What do these words mean? Ecstasis is the transliteration of a Greek word ekstasis or ἔκστασις. It means to "extend outwards" to "stretch out." It is the word from which we derive the English word ecstasy. It is used here for the desire of union with the Divine. This ecstasis need not be religious in origin, though it most often is. For example, the neo-Platonic philosopher Plotinus, no Christian himself, in his Enneads speaks of his ecstasis, his virtual experience of union, with his philosophic notion of God which was based upon a natural theology. The term ecstasis was readily adopted by Christians to describe the union with the Trinity. Levering's point is that the Natural Law must recognize ecstasis, a desire for union with God, which means that our lives on earth are ordered to God.


The second requirement that Levering argues is required for an adequate theory of Natural Law is a teleology of nature. The word teleology is a technical word derived from a combination of two Greek words: telos (τέλος), which means "end", "purpose", or "goal," and logos (λόγος), a word which means "reason" or "word." For example, in the Gospel of Christ Christ is referred to as the Logos of God, the Word or Reason (logos) of God. John 1:1. In St. Paul's letter to the Romans, Christ is also referred to the end (telos) of the Law. Rom. 10:4. As applied to Nature, a teleological view would include the concept that God created nature, including the nature of man, and that He did so with a plan, a purpose, an end, a reason in view.

In short, requiring a theory of Natural Law to possess a notion of ecstasis and a notion of teleological nature means that God is both the origin and the end of things, including man. God is the alpha (A), He is the omega (Ω), the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, and the first and last letters of the Natural Law. Put another way, the requirement that a theory of Natural Law include notions of ecstasis and notions of teleology in nature mean that a theory of Natural Law must presuppose Eternal Law.

The traditional or classical notion of Natural Law includes both notions of ecstasis and teleology in nature. This notion of Natural Law found its most mature expression among the Stoics, e.g., Cicero, and was advocated in modified form by the Church, e.g., in St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, as consonant with, and in fact revealed in, Scripture and Tradition. Many modern theories of the Natural Law shun notions of ecstasis. They turn not outward to God (ecstasis), but wholly inward (in what may be called an entasis) to man. Though a turning inward to man is not fatal to a theory of the Natural Law (in fact it would be part of our discovery of our nature), it is when this turning inward is exclusive or in opposition to the turning outward to God that it becomes a problematic to a theory of Natural Law.

The story of how the Natural Law came to be progressively emancipated from its theological roots is a long one, and there are many controversial points about it, for example who initiated the process, and whether the arguments made to justify such emancipation are valid or not. Regardless, Levering calls this disassociation from of the Natural Law from its original theological roots the "Anthropocentric Turn" or "Anthropocentric Shift." He wrests out eight individuals from history to make his point. And for the next series of reflection we will rely on his choices: Renè Descartes, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, George W. F. Hegel, and Friederich Nietzsche. There are many others Levering could have chosen (e.g., Ockham, Scotus, Machiavelli, or Luther). Though these may (or may not) have been believers in various shades, the "natural law" of Messrs. Hobbes, Hume, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, and Hegel is not the Natural Law. These gentlemen's ideas are already on the way out of the Porch (Stoa) or the Church (Ekklesia) , and in some instances completely out of the Porch or the Church into the Wilderness.

To a greater or lesser degree, each of these men rejected the notion of ecstasis and teleology in nature. In some cases, there was no apparent rejection, but some of their presuppositions would lead to or implied such rejection. Each played a part in the Western world's turning from God as the measure of all things, including Law, to Man as the measure of all things, in particular Law. Some of their notions have prevailed and are assumed in modern culture, and we have to be aware of them in order to understand better the Natural Law, to reject these ideas, or to respond to them.

Natural Law Travels by Motorcycle

THE ONLY ENCYCLICAL EVER WRITTEN IN GERMAN, Mit Brennender Sorge (German for "With burning anxiety"), was signed by Pope Pius XI on March 10, 1937. Relying upon the Natural Law and the teachings of the Gospel, the Encyclical denounced Nazism, its pagan underpinnings and racist ideology, and condemned antisemitism. This Encyclical was written with a sense of urgency, fervency, and rigor. It was short on diplomacy, and long on zeal. There is no sign in it of curial romanità; it was penned in the spirit of a Jewish prophet. Thus sayeth the Lord!

Using forthright, strong, and uncompromising language, the Encyclical was drafted by Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII, and quietly distributed around the German parishes by a cadre of Swiss motorcyclists. On Palm Sunday 1937, the Encyclical was read aloud in all parish churches in its original German. It set forth the Church's teaching on the evils of the German brand of National Socialism and antisemitism. It described Hitler as a "prophet of nothingness" (Wahnprophet) with "repulsive pride" (widerliche Hochmut). Nazi reprisals quickly followed. Though the reprisals were expected, their virulence was not. Many thousands of religious and priests were rounded up, falsely tried on all manner of trumped-up charges, imprisoned in concentration camps, and put to death with their Jewish elder brothers. Sanguis martyrum semen Christianorum. The blood of martyrs is the seed of Christians.

The Encyclical makes a clear invocation of the Natural Law:

30. Such is the rush of present-day life that it severs from the divine foundation of Revelation, not only morality, but also the theoretical and practical rights. We are especially referring to what is called the natural law (Naturrecht), written by the Creator's hand on the tablet of the heart (Rom. ii. 14) and which reason, not blinded by sin or passion, can easily read. It is in the light of the commands of this natural law, that all positive law, whoever be the lawgiver, can be gauged in its moral content, and hence, in the authority it wields over conscience. Human laws in flagrant contradiction with the natural law are vitiated with a taint which no force, no power can mend. In the light of this principle one must judge the axiom, that "right is common utility," a proposition which may be given a correct significance, it means that what is morally indefensible, can never contribute to the good of the people. But ancient paganism acknowledged that the axiom, to be entirely true, must be reversed and be made to say: "Nothing can be useful, if it is not at the same time morally good" (Cicero, De Off. ii. 30). Emancipated from this oral rule, the principle would in international law carry a perpetual state of war between nations; for it ignores in national life, by confusion of right and utility, the basic fact that man as a person possesses rights he holds from God, and which any collectivity must protect against denial, suppression or neglect. To overlook this truth is to forget that the real common good ultimately takes its measure from man's nature, which balances personal rights and social obligations, and from the purpose of society, established for the benefit of human nature. Society, was intended by the Creator for the full development of individual possibilities, and for the social benefits, which by a give and take process, every one can claim for his own sake and that of others. Higher and more general values, which collectivity alone can provide, also derive from theCreator for the good of man, and for the full development, natural and supernatural, and the realization of his perfection. To neglect this order is to shake the pillars on which society rests, and to compromise social tranquility, security and existence.

35. Im verhängnisvollen Zug der Zeit liegt es, wie die Sittenlehre, so auch die Grundlagen des Rechtslebens und der Rechtspflege vom wahren Gottesglauben und von den geoffenbarten Gottesgeboten mehr und mehr abzulösen. Wir denken hier besonders an das sogenannte Naturrecht, das vom Finger des Schöpfers selbst in die Tafeln des Menschenherzens geschrieben wurde und von der gesunden, durch Sünde und Leidenschaft nicht verblendeten Vernunft von diesen Tafeln abgelesen werden kann. An den Geboten dieses Naturrechts kann jedes positive Recht, von welchem Gesetzgeber es auch kommen mag, auf seinen sittlichen Gehalt, damit auf seine sittliche Befehlsmacht und Gewissensverpflichtung nachgeprüft werden. Menschliche Gesetze, die mit dem Naturrecht in unlösbarem Widerspruch stehen, kranken an einem Geburtsfehler, den kein Zwangsmittel, keine äußere Machtentfaltung sanieren kann. Mit diesem Maßstab muß auch der Grundsatz: „Recht ist, was dem Volke nützt“, gemessen werden, wenn man unterstellt, daß sittlich Unerlaubtes nie dem wahren Wohle des Volkes zu dienen vermag. Indes hat schon das alte Heidentum erkannt, daß der Satz, um völlig richtig zu sein, eigentlich umgekehrt werden und lauten muß: „Nie ist etwas nützlich, wenn es nicht gleichzeitig sittlich gut ist. Und nicht weil nützlich, ist es sittlich gut, sondern weil sittlich gut, ist es auch nützlich.“Von dieser Sittenregel losgelöst, würde jener Grundsatz im zwischenstaatlichen Leben den ewigen Kriegszustand zwischen den verschiedenen Nationen bedeuten. Im innerstaatlichen Leben verkennt er, Nützlichkeits- und Rechtserwägungen miteinander verquickend, die grundlegende Tatsache, daß der Mensch als Persönlichkeit gottgegebene Rechte besitzt, die jedem auf ihre Leugnung, Aufhebung oder Brachlegung abzielenden Eingriff vonseiten der Gemeinschaft entzogen bleiben müssen. Die Mißachtung dieser Wahrheit übersieht, daß das wahre Gemeinwohl letztlich bestimmt und erkannt wird aus der Natur des Menschen mit ihrem harmonischen Ausgleich zwischen persönlichem Recht und sozialer Bindung, sowie aus dem durch die gleiche Menschennatur bestimmten Zweck der Gemeinschaft. Die Gemeinschaft ist vom Schöpfer gewollt als Mittel zur vollen Entfaltung der individuellen und sozialen Anlagen, die der Einzelmensch, gebend und nehmend, zu seinem und aller anderen Wohl auszuwerten hat. Auch jene umfassenderen und höheren Werte, die nicht vom Einzelnen, sondern nur von der Gemeinschaft verwirklicht werden können, sind vom Schöpfer letzten Endes des Menschen halber gewollt, zu seiner natürlichen und übernatürlichen Entfaltung und Vollendung. Ein Abweichen von dieser Ordnung rüttelt an den Tragpfeilern, auf denen die Gemeinschaft ruht, und gefährdet damit Ruhe, Sicherheit, ja Bestand der Gemeinschaft selbst.

Throughout history, this message--of which every tyrant of every time and every place must be reminded--has traveled in many different ways. Inscrutably, by God's design it is always present in the human heart, though there it may be ignored or repressed. On occasion, however, it must be trumpeted by a Pope. It must be put on paper, and carried forth from Rome and smuggled to the faithful. It must ride on motorcycle across guarded borders to the parish pulpit, there to be proclaimed anew in their native tongue so as to enter their ears and back into the recesses of their hearts. Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. And all this to the everlasting chagrin of the Spirit of Tyranny, that is to say the Devil.