What things are contained in natural law?

[Moore11]

This is a Philosophy forum. You are presupposing the existence of God - and one particular interpretation of God.

How do you determine which laws have been given by God?

It is a philosophy forum on a Catholic blog and for the purposes of the thread we should presuppose the Catholic God. I am asking for a Catholic perspective and since the sub context is the Church’s teaching on salvation in invincible ignorance within the confines of Natural law I would think it would be clear what we are presupposing. If this should be posted somewhere else then the Mods should move it.

How do I determine which laws are given by God? I don’t. The Church does.

This is the description under the heading in the philosophy sub forum.

Discussion of philosophy, with an emphasis on Catholic contributions

If this is in the wrong forum where we are not even discussing this issue from a Catholic perspective then I wonder where it should go. I am new so it is entirely possible that I am in the wrong place.

 

[tonyrey]

It is a philosophy forum on a Catholic blog and for the purposes of the thread we should presuppose the Catholic God. I am asking for a Catholic perspective and since the sub context is the Church’s teaching on salvation in invincible ignorance within the confines of Natural law I would think it would be clear what we are presupposing. If this should be posted somewhere else then the Mods should move it.

How do I determine which laws are given by God? I don’t. The Church does.

This is the description under the heading in the philosophy sub forum.

If this is in the wrong forum where we are not even discussing this issue from a Catholic perspective then I wonder where it should go. I am new so it is entirely possible that I am in the wrong place.

You are in the right place but it leads to less confusion if you specify the context of your question at the outset.

 

[LegoGE1947]

This is a Philosophy forum. You are presupposing the existence of God - and one particular interpretation of God.

How do you determine which laws have been given by God?

We could start with the Commandments as written in Exodus 20. These things are written on the hearts of all human beings even the most primative. Even they know intuitively that it is wrong to steal, commit adultery, covet another’s property, to commit murder, etc. I’ve heard that even criminals, if they steal something and someone steals what they stole, they will get angry and seek revenge.

 

[LegoGE1947]

John:

Well said. I thank you for putting it together succinctly. I hoped that someone would undertake the task!

Moore, what questions do you have, for now we can get into the details.

God bless John,
jd

Recently there was a news story of a young mother whose house was being broken into and to protect her children, she took a shot gun and blew the intruder away. The law called this “justifiable homicide” since she was seeking to protect herself and her children.

 

[John21652]

The problem is that there is no more “normal”

Lots of people complain about this today, me included! What was normal seems today to be considered wrong and what used to be considered wrong is today considered to be right. However, that doesn’t mean there is no more “normal”. It simply means people have stopped examining what normal is. There is an objective normal and all it takes is for people to stop and have a think about it. What used to be abnormal is being allowed because of the call of “human rights”, which just means that everyone should have the right to do as they please, even if it is abnormal. Somehwere along the way, the adage about Natural Rights was changed into the catchcry of Human Rights. There is a difference. What’s even worse, instead of simply allowing people to do what is abnormal, the move is to make what is abnormal seem normal. Which is described in your next sentence, which is -

What may be normal for you has been perverted by our society.

It is not simply a case of what seems normal to “you”, but what has been considered as normal down through the record of human civilisation. It is an objective idea of normal and it is that objectivity that the appearance of normal can’t defeat, no matter what any propogandists say and no matter how people behave. There is just too much human history for that objective idea of normal, of normative behaviour, to be overthrown.

So one has to follow natural law to be saved outside of Christianity. But we cannot pin down what that law consists of or how one could follow it.

We can indeed pin down what the Natural Law consists of. In an earlier post I gave the Ten Commandments as a prime example of Natural Law moral edicts. Ten things you are not allowed to do. You are not allowed to do them because they infringe the Natural Rights of others, plus the doing of those ten things offends God. These Natural Rights are not just a ‘Christian thing’, as the handing of the Ten Commandments to Moses attests. They are to be found in much earlier Laws. The ancient Code of Hammurabiis a prime example. Hammurabi was ruler of babylon and he drew up his code around 1750 BC. It is a Natural Law legal and moral code drawn up by Hammurabi who described himself as “…the exalted prince, who feared God, to bring about the rule of righteousness in the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil-doers; so that the strong should not harm the weak; so that I should rule over the black-headed people like Shamash, and enlighten the land, to further the well-being of mankind.” He had the wrong god, but he had the right idea!

The Code of Hammurabi includes legal and moral edicts alsmost exactly the same as the Ten Commandments. Murder, theft, adultery and even fornication were outlawed. The penalties were harsh.

Now come forward in history and to the Stoics and Aristotle, who promulgated a natural law theory of human morality. Then forward even further to ancient Rome. Rome’s legal system was a Natural Law based one. One of its most famous champions was the orator, philosopher and politician Cicero, who enunciated Natural Law and Natural Rights. Thomas Jefferson credited Cicero with having given the traditions which helped frame the U.S. Declaration of Independence.

The DoI is a natural law document. It speaks of the “inalenable rights” of man, specifically the right to freedom, property and the pursuit of happiness. The recognition that man needs to live in a society, as an innate desire and that rules and edicts are required for that to happen.

Another is the Virginia Declaration of 1776. It speaks that

“… all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights of which…[they cannot divest;] namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety,”

Compare the Code of Hammurabi to what the DoI says -

“we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

There seems to be something very common to the way people down through the ages have percieved, or sensed, what is right and wrong, what is necessary to the proper functioning of human beings and the societies in which they live. It seems to be a common sense.

Basically what I am saying is that it appears to me that the law of the old and new covenants ARE natural law. So one who was in ignorance of Christianity would still have to live by the bounds of the written law to be saved and only Mary and a few other saints have even been said to have done that. So while I can accept that God can save however he wants and I accept that the Church is correct in the teaching of invincible ignorance I do not understand how that it is possible that one could ever be saved outside of the sacraments.

If one follows a Natural Law morality, even outside of the realm of the Church, one would be living with the Church’s view of a Godly morality. If one avoids the Church because of invincible ignorance, but still lives according to the right dictates of morality, in accordance with a reasoned view of human nature, then one would be living a Catholic life anyway. The sacraments are the Church’s recognition of that right moral order.

I think that when we blurr the lines of what natural law is and how one is saved and even if God WILL save anyone outside of the normative way then we do others a HUGE disservice and hollowly excuse away our culpability or own need to evangelize.

Probably true.

 

[LegoGE1947]

Lots of people complain about this today, me included! What was normal seems today to be considered wrong and what used to be considered wrong is today considered to be right. However, that doesn’t mean there is no more “normal”. It simply means people have stopped examining what normal is. There is an objective normal and all it takes is for people to stop and have a think about it. What used to be abnormal is being allowed because of the call of “human rights”, which just means that everyone should have the right to do as they please, even if it is abnormal. Somehwere along the way, the adage about Natural Rights was changed into the catchcry of Human Rights. There is a difference. What’s even worse, instead of simply allowing people to do what is abnormal, the move is to make what is abnormal seem normal. Which is described in your next sentence, which is -
It is not simply a case of what seems normal to “you”, but what has been considered as normal down through the record of human civilisation. It is an objective idea of normal and it is that objectivity that the appearance of normal can’t defeat, no matter what any propogandists say and no matter how people behave. There is just too much human history for that objective idea of normal, of normative behaviour, to be overthrown.

We can indeed pin down what the Natural Law consists of. In an earlier post I gave the Ten Commandments as a prime example of Natural Law moral edicts. Ten things you are not allowed to do. You are not allowed to do them because they infringe the Natural Rights of others, plus the doing of those ten things offends God. These Natural Rights are not just a ‘Christian thing’, as the handing of the Ten Commandments to Moses attests. They are to be found in much earlier Laws. The ancient Code of Hammurabiis a prime example. Hammurabi was ruler of babylon and he drew up his code around 1750 BC. It is a Natural Law legal and moral code drawn up by Hammurabi who described himself as “…the exalted prince, who feared God, to bring about the rule of righteousness in the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil-doers; so that the strong should not harm the weak; so that I should rule over the black-headed people like Shamash, and enlighten the land, to further the well-being of mankind.” He had the wrong god, but he had the right idea!

The Code of Hammurabi includes legal and moral edicts alsmost exactly the same as the Ten Commandments. Murder, theft, adultery and even fornication were outlawed. The penalties were harsh.

Now come forward in history and to the Stoics and Aristotle, who promulgated a natural law theory of human morality. Then forward even further to ancient Rome. Rome’s legal system was a Natural Law based one. One of its most famous champions was the orator, philosopher and politician Cicero, who enunciated Natural Law and Natural Rights. Thomas Jefferson credited Cicero with having given the traditions which helped frame the U.S. Declaration of Independence.

The DoI is a natural law document. It speaks of the “inalenable rights” of man, specifically the right to freedom, property and the pursuit of happiness. The recognition that man needs to live in a society, as an innate desire and that rules and edicts are required for that to happen.

Another is the Virginia Declaration of 1776. It speaks that Compare the Code of Hammurabi to what the DoI says - There seems to be something very common to the way people down through the ages have percieved, or sensed, what is right and wrong, what is necessary to the proper functioning of human beings and the societies in which they live. It seems to be a common sense.

If one follows a Natural Law morality, even outside of the realm of the Church, one would be living with the Church’s view of a Godly morality. If one avoids the Church because of invincible ignorance, but still lives according to the right dictates of morality, in accordance with a reasoned view of human nature, then one would be living a Catholic life anyway. The sacraments are the Church’s recognition of that right moral order. Probably true.

There IS a Normal. It is a town in central Illinois near Bloomington. As we sometimes joke in Illinois “Bloomington is as close to “Normal” as some people get!”