J
josephback
Guest
Hi all. I’m writing a novel that would seek to communicate the content of Romans within an entertaining story format. It overlaps with a discussion of justice in civil society and any feedback on argument non sequiturs or holes would be appreciated. See below.
Namely this: that I contest the ability of law to achieve justice.”
The prosecutor jumped to his feet. “The prisoner has condemned himself! The trial is over…”
Judge Samuelson rebuked him, “The trial is not over. The prisoner will be allowed to speak.”
Why was he helping me? However, I wasn’t going to protest. I went on, “Justice is a word that can be taken to mean different things, depending on the person who uses it. In order to avoid mere opinions, though, there must be a universal definition. Is there one? Yes. Justice is derived from the Latin justitia, of which the root jus refers to law or right. It is understood then that the laws of a state, when in agreement to the higher and universal moral law, define this virtue. Justice then consists above all in doing the good. Yet the law, though it can reward or punish, does not provide the power to choose the good. This requires a free act of will on the part of the individual, a decision by no means certain.
“In my days as a police duty sergeant, and later on with the state police, the men and women I would take in ran the gamut. They went from city dwelling urbanites to country dwelling folks. I was reminded, over and over, that we are uncivilized. For whatever reason, I never wanted to apply this to myself. Not until recently was I even willing to. Still the question remains: Why are we unjust?”
“Just as many of our unique terms point back to our history as a prison colony, so we re-main subject to an internal deprivation of justice and holiness which we on our own remain powerless to change. This lack of essential and internalized justice extends not just to one man, or within only certain groups, but to all men: both they who rule and those who are ruled.”
“Finally, in no way does my refutation endorse anarchy. It is because we are uncivilized that we need the laws. Law is good, when it is being used to maintain society. We enforce codes against murder, speeding, and theft, because we recognize such directives to be beneficial to society. In a true civilization, though, we would need no outward constraints, for the law within would tell us how and when to do what is right. Ultimately, a state of justice that has been merely external will fail, for no law we pass or will pass can reform man. The true and lived reality of justice will come only when we behave in accordance with the law written on human hearts. This alone is how we should define, as well as hope to become, a just and a justified people.”
Namely this: that I contest the ability of law to achieve justice.”
The prosecutor jumped to his feet. “The prisoner has condemned himself! The trial is over…”
Judge Samuelson rebuked him, “The trial is not over. The prisoner will be allowed to speak.”
Why was he helping me? However, I wasn’t going to protest. I went on, “Justice is a word that can be taken to mean different things, depending on the person who uses it. In order to avoid mere opinions, though, there must be a universal definition. Is there one? Yes. Justice is derived from the Latin justitia, of which the root jus refers to law or right. It is understood then that the laws of a state, when in agreement to the higher and universal moral law, define this virtue. Justice then consists above all in doing the good. Yet the law, though it can reward or punish, does not provide the power to choose the good. This requires a free act of will on the part of the individual, a decision by no means certain.
“In my days as a police duty sergeant, and later on with the state police, the men and women I would take in ran the gamut. They went from city dwelling urbanites to country dwelling folks. I was reminded, over and over, that we are uncivilized. For whatever reason, I never wanted to apply this to myself. Not until recently was I even willing to. Still the question remains: Why are we unjust?”
“Just as many of our unique terms point back to our history as a prison colony, so we re-main subject to an internal deprivation of justice and holiness which we on our own remain powerless to change. This lack of essential and internalized justice extends not just to one man, or within only certain groups, but to all men: both they who rule and those who are ruled.”
“Finally, in no way does my refutation endorse anarchy. It is because we are uncivilized that we need the laws. Law is good, when it is being used to maintain society. We enforce codes against murder, speeding, and theft, because we recognize such directives to be beneficial to society. In a true civilization, though, we would need no outward constraints, for the law within would tell us how and when to do what is right. Ultimately, a state of justice that has been merely external will fail, for no law we pass or will pass can reform man. The true and lived reality of justice will come only when we behave in accordance with the law written on human hearts. This alone is how we should define, as well as hope to become, a just and a justified people.”
