Why don't all agree with natural law?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheAdvocate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TheAdvocate

Guest
If natural law is the law written on our hearts as St. Paul writes, wouldn’t everyone agree with it? And yet, so much of humanity even argues over things that would normally considered to be natural law. Why is this? If it’s “natural”, shouldn’t it also be obvious? (Most of the examples that I see of natural law seem to be no-brainer laws, like prohibitions against suicide, overeating; promoting the right to protect your goods.

Can you think any examples of what we would call natural law that so much of humanity just doesn’t “get”? (Homosexuality or the procreative purpose of sex is an easy example).

So again, my question is two-fold:
  1. Why wouldn’t all people agree with natural law, given that it’s “natural”)?
    AND
  2. What are some examples of laws that we consider natural but that are commonly disputed?
I’d be so grateful for your answers.
 
This from the Catechism may help to answer your first question:
1960 The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known “by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error.” The natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in accordance with the work of the Spirit.
Natural law is the foundation and “necessary basis” of the law, but it must be built up and refined by revealed law (Scripture, Tradition, teachings of the Church) and by grace.
 
Natural law does not mean a natural inclination from birth where every person can clearly discern right from wrong.

A society can present inclinations and behaviors that many individuals assume is a right action but alas, is not.

Do all agree on it? Probably not, at this point in time because we are already slanted against natural law.

Natural law would have to be something with time, trial and error going for it. A truth that has stood the test of time.
 
In the sense of a truth all know to be true and universal from the process of trial and error over the centuries they do exist; we know murder is wrong, we know rape is wrong and very basic things like this.

The reason why you won’t find non Catholics agreeing on “Natural Laws” such as those against Sodomy is because short of scripture there are few logical reasoned arguments against them (yes yes, I know, reproduction systems aren’t meant to work like that, neither is the hair on my legs “designed” to be cut but I still wax them) and opposition to them has never been universal, often entirely restricted to the Christian and Islamic world which drew its conclusions from faith and dictates from authority, not conscience or observation as natural law would require.
 
Beryllos said:
This from the Catechism may help to answer your first question:
1960 The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known “by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error.” The natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in accordance with the work of the Spirit.
Natural law is the foundation and “necessary basis” of the law, but it must be built up and refined by revealed law (Scripture, Tradition, teachings of the Church) and by grace.
Click to expand...
Nearly every question in the forum including this thread could be referred to the Catechism as above. It answers every question so eloquently and succinctly.
 
In addition to the Catechism:

Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI
**
416. In what does the natural moral law consist?**

1954-1960
1978-1979

The natural law which is inscribed by the Creator on the heart of every person consists in a participation in the wisdom and the goodness of God. It expresses that original moral sense which enables one to discern by reason the good and the bad. It is universal and immutable and determines the basis of the duties and fundamental rights of the person as well as those of the human community and civil law.

417. Is such a law perceived by everyone?

1960

Because of sin the natural law is not always perceived nor is it recognized by everyone with equal clarity and immediacy.

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html
 
friardchips said:
Nearly every question in the forum including this thread could be referred to the Catechism as above. It answers every question so eloquently and succinctly.
Click to expand...
At times I have a silly daydream in which I create a CAF username like CatechismBoy and post nothing but Catechism… but for me that would be too restrictive!
 
Beryllos said:
This from the Catechism may help to answer your first question:
1960 The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known “by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error.” The natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in accordance with the work of the Spirit.
Natural law is the foundation and “necessary basis” of the law, but it must be built up and refined by revealed law (Scripture, Tradition, teachings of the Church) and by grace.
Click to expand...
Yes, and that’s why we needed the revealed or public law, such as the Decalogue. As Augustine put it, “God wrote on tables of the Law what man did not read in his heart”.

And this is simply because of our fallen condition. When Adam disobeyed God he was rejecting His authority, and therefore His godhood; Adam became his own “god” determining morality for himself. IOW, morality became relative for man at that point. From then on we would not have absolute certainty about right and wrong-and loss of self-mastery is one result of man being separated from his Creator.
 
Beryllos said:
At times I have a silly daydream in which I create a CAF username like CatechismBoy and post nothing but Catechism… but for me that would be too restrictive!
Click to expand...
Maybe you’d be surprised. It might be freeing!
 
fhansen said:
Yes, and that’s why we needed the revealed or public law, such as the Decalogue. As Augustine put it, “God wrote on tables of the Law what man did not read in his heart”.
Click to expand...
The symbolism of “heart of stone” in the Old Testament was not an idea lost on Augustine. Writing the moral law on “men’s hearts” is something very like writing it on stone.

What is interesting, though, is that when the mob brought the adulterous woman before Jesus, he wrote “in the sand.” Seems to me an obvious allusion to the fact that the hearts Jesus was dealing with were no longer “of stone” but more like shifting sand. Even more difficult to write the moral law on sand than on stone, it seems.

Of course, we could take the next step and point out the obvious that “hearts of sand” is an appropriate metaphor for moral relativism.
 
friardchips said:
Nearly every question in the forum including this thread could be referred to the Catechism as above. It answers every question so eloquently and succinctly.
Click to expand...
I read the relevant CCC sections before posting this. I’m just not as smart as you, so I was seeking greater clarity, and I am very appreciative to those who have contributed to this thread so far.
 
I don’t know whether smart is the word but I would check anything you hear on this forum back on the CCC again 🙂 See if the opinions still hold weight. It is heartening to see that people care so much on these threads. And interesting too.
 
TheAdvocate said:
Why wouldn’t all people agree with natural law, given that it’s “natural”)?
AND
Click to expand...
By natural is what we mean when we say that God had a plan for nature, and we should follow that plan as nature indicates.

But Satan has a different plan, and he is adamant that we should follow his plan, which is to get us all into hell because misery loves company.

So he clouds our minds and distorts our vision of what is natural, and he exalts the unnatural as our “natural” end.
 
The second part of the question wasn’t addressed much in the answers so far.
  1. What are some examples of laws that we consider natural but that are commonly disputed?
 
TheAdvocate said:
The second part of the question wasn’t addressed much in the answers so far.
  1. What are some examples of laws that we consider natural but that are commonly disputed?
Click to expand...
A lot concern the inviolable right to life. Many are disputing that capital punishment should be abolished based on the belief that a divine decree to Noah should trump all the natural law reasoning for its abolition.
 
Hey, Everybody! Peace be with you.

I was looking for something else in the Catechism and stumbled across a passage that describes natural law in another way, that Man is created in the image of God, and touches on the question posed in the thread title.
1704 The human person participates in the light and power of the divine Spirit. By his reason, he is capable of understanding the order of things established by the Creator. By free will, he is capable of directing himself toward his true good. He finds his perfection “in seeking and loving what is true and good.”
…
1706 By his reason, man recognizes the voice of God which urges him “to do what is good and avoid what is evil.” Everyone is obliged to follow this law, which makes itself heard in conscience and is fulfilled in the love of God and of neighbor. Living a moral life bears witness to the dignity of the person.

1707 “Man, enticed by the Evil One, abused his freedom at the very beginning of history.” He succumbed to temptation and did what was evil. He still desires the good, but his nature bears the wound of original sin. He is now inclined to evil and subject to error:
Man is divided in himself. As a result, the whole life of men, both individual and social, shows itself to be a struggle, and a dramatic one, between good and evil, between light and darkness.​
 
Beryllos said:
Hey, Everybody! Peace be with you.

I was looking for something else in the Catechism and stumbled across a passage that describes natural law in another way, that Man is created in the image of God, and touches on the question posed in the thread title.
1704 The human person participates in the light and power of the divine Spirit. By his reason, he is capable of understanding the order of things established by the Creator. By free will, he is capable of directing himself toward his true good. He finds his perfection “in seeking and loving what is true and good.”
…
1706 By his reason, man recognizes the voice of God which urges him “to do what is good and avoid what is evil.” Everyone is obliged to follow this law, which makes itself heard in conscience and is fulfilled in the love of God and of neighbor. Living a moral life bears witness to the dignity of the person.

1707 “Man, enticed by the Evil One, abused his freedom at the very beginning of history.” He succumbed to temptation and did what was evil. He still desires the good, but his nature bears the wound of original sin. He is now inclined to evil and subject to error:
Man is divided in himself. As a result, the whole life of men, both individual and social, shows itself to be a struggle, and a dramatic one, between good and evil, between light and darkness.​
Click to expand...
👍 Great quotes. Here’s more, which are followed by Church teachings on the “Old Law” and the “New Law”, essentially the differences between the Old and New Covenants:

**I. THE NATURAL MORAL LAW

1954 Man participates in the wisdom and goodness of the Creator who gives him mastery over his acts and the ability to govern himself with a view to the true and the good. The natural law expresses the original moral sense which enables man to discern by reason the good and the evil, the truth and the lie:

The natural law is written and engraved in the soul of each and every man, because it is human reason ordaining him to do good and forbidding him to sin . . . But this command of human reason would not have the force of law if it were not the voice and interpreter of a higher reason to which our spirit and our freedom must be submitted.5

1955 The “divine and natural” law6 shows man the way to follow so as to practice the good and attain his end. The natural law states the first and essential precepts which govern the moral life. It hinges upon the desire for God and submission to him, who is the source and judge of all that is good, as well as upon the sense that the other is one’s equal. Its principal precepts are expressed in the Decalogue. This law is called “natural,” not in reference to the nature of irrational beings, but because reason which decrees it properly belongs to human nature:

Where then are these rules written, if not in the book of that light we call the truth? In it is written every just law; from it the law passes into the heart of the man who does justice, not that it migrates into it, but that it places its imprint on it, like a seal on a ring that passes onto wax, without leaving the ring.7 The natural law is nothing other than the light of understanding placed in us by God; through it we know what we must do and what we must avoid. God has given this light or law at the creation.8

1956 The natural law, present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties:

For there is a true law: right reason. It is in conformity with nature, is diffused among all men, and is immutable and eternal; its orders summon to duty; its prohibitions turn away from offense . . . . To replace it with a contrary law is a sacrilege; failure to apply even one of its provisions is forbidden; no one can abrogate it entirely.9
**
 
TheAdvocate said:
The second part of the question wasn’t addressed much in the answers so far.
  1. What are some examples of laws that we consider natural but that are commonly disputed?
Click to expand...
Natural Law indicates that marriage can only exist between a man and a women. Is there any question that this is being disputed?
 
Good book on natural law - “50 Questions on Natural Law” by Charles Rice - Professor of the jurisprudence of St.Thomas for thirty years at Notre Dame Law School very understandable. He answers questions repeatedly asked by his students.
Peace be with you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top