NATURAL LAW THEORY

by Jon Raymer P. Oclarit

INTRODUCTION

In this lesson, we will know the concept of ethics of Thomas Aquinas which is built upon Aristotle’s
theory of ethics by understanding human nature as having source and ultimate end in God. By this,
Aquinas identifies the four (4) kinds of laws governing the universe, especially of man; these include the
Natural Law. Here are following intended learning outcomes for this lesson:
• Recognize the concept of Moral Constitution vis-à-vis Aquinas’ Moral Philosophy;
• Compare and contrast between Aristotle and Aquinas concept of Happiness in relation to Moral
Experience;
• Illustrate the four (4) kinds of law according to Aquinas; and
• Use Natural Law Theory on various scenarios found in Applied Ethics.

MOTIVATION

1. Interview at least three (2) members of your household. Ask them on their positions regarding
the following topics: (a) abortion; and (b) use of contraceptives.

2. The following questions are to be asked: (a) Are you in favor of abortion? Why yes or why not?;
and (b) How about the use of contraceptives? Why yes or why not?
 LESSON PROPER

Moral Constitution

Before we delve into the theory of Natural Law it is first

important to know and understand what is the Ethics of Thomas
Aquinas (1225-1274). Aquinas built upon Aristotle’s theory of ethics.
Like Aristotle he considered ethics a quest for happiness. Moreover,
following Aristotle’s lead, Aquinas argued that happiness is
connected closely with our end or purpose. To achieve happiness, we
must fulfill our purpose. But whereas Aristotle envisioned a
naturalistic morality whereby people could achieve virtue and
happiness by fulfilling their natural capacities or end, Aquinas added
to this concept of a person’s supernatural end. As a Christian, Aquinas
viewed human nature as having both its source and ultimate end in God. For this reason, human nature
does not contain its own standards of fulfillment. It is not enough for us simply to be human and to
exercise our natural functions and abilities in order to
achieve perfect happiness. Aristotle thought such a
naturalistic ethics was possible. Aquinas agreed with
most of his claim, adding only that the Aristotelian
ethics is incomplete. Aquinas therefore argued that
there is a dual level to morality corresponding to our
natural end and to our supernatural end.
 The ingredients of our moral experience are
provided by human nature. For one thing, the fact
that we have bodies inclines us to certain kinds of
acts. Our senses become vehicle for appetites and
passions. Our senses also provide a certain level of
knowledge about sensible objects so that we are
attracted to some objects, which we perceive as
pleasurable and good (concupiscent appetite), and
repelled by other objects, which we perceive as harmful, painful, or bad (irascible appetite). This attraction
and rejection are the rudiments of our capacity for love and pleasure, and hate and fear.
In animals these irascible and concupiscent appetites immediately control and direct behavior. In
a person, however, the will, in collaboration with the power of reason, consummates the human act. The
will is the agency that inclines a person toward the achievement of good. That is, our full range of appetites
satisfied, and the process of satisfaction requires that we make choices between alternative objects. We
must make this choice by our wills under the direction of reason. If we make right choices, then we achieve
happiness. But not every choice is a correct one. For this reason, the will by itself cannot always make the
right move; the intellect must be the guide. Nor is the intellect the final source of knowledge, for our
supernatural end requires God’s grace and revealed truth. Still, the will represents our appetite for the
good and right, whereas the int ellect has the function and capacity for apprehending the general or
universal meaning of what is good. The intellect is our highest faculty, and a natural end requires that the
intellect, as well as the other faculties, seek its appropriate object. The appropriate object of the intellect
is truth, and truth in its fullness is God. When the intellect directs the will, then, it helps the will to choose
the good. The intellect knows, however, that there is a hierarchy of goods and that some goods are limited
and must not be mistake for our most appropriate and ultimate good. Riches, pleasure, power, and
knowledge are all goods and are legitimate
objects of the appetites, but they cannot
produce our deepest happiness because they do
not possess the character of the universal good
that our souls seek. The perfect happiness is
found not in created things but in God, who is the
supreme good.
 Moral constitution consists, then of sensuality, appetites, the will, and reason. What confers on
a person the attributes of morality is that these elements are the ingredients of free acts. If I am moved
to act by my appetites in a mechanical or rigorously determined way, then my acts will not be free and
cannot be considered from a moral point of view. Not only is freedom a prerequisite for an act to be
considered moral, but Aquinas adds that an act is human only if it is free. For freedom is possible only
where there is knowledge of alternatives and the power of will to make choices. Virtue, or goodness,
consists in making that the virtues of the natural person are achieved when the appetites are duly
controlled by the will and reason. The dominant or “cardinal” natural virtues are courage, temperance,
justice, and prudence. In addition to these particular virtues, our natural end is further realized through
our knowledge of the natural law, that is, the moral law.

Natural Law

Morality, as Aquinas viewed it, is not an arbitrary set of

rules for behavior. Rather, the basis of moral obligation is found,
first of all, in human nature itself. Built into our nature are
various inclinations, such as the preservation of life, the
propagation of species, and, because people are rational, the
inclination toward the search for truth. The basic moral truth is
simply to “do good and avoid evil.” As rational beings, then, we are under a basic natural obligation to
protect our lives and health, in which case suicide and carelessness are wrong. Second, the natural
inclination to propagate the species forms the basis of the union of wife and husband, and any other basis
for this relation would be wrong. And third, because we seek for truth, we can do this best by living in
peace in society with all others who are also engaged in this quest. To ensure an ordered society, human
laws are fashioned for the direction of the community’s
behavior. These activities of preserving life, propagating the
species, forming an ordered society under human laws, and
pursuing the quest for truth—all these, again, pertain to us at
our natural level. The moral law is founded upon human
nature, upon the natural inclination toward specific types of
behavior, and upon the reason’s ability to discern the right
course of conduct. Because human nature has certain fixed features, the rules for behavior that
correspond to these features are called natural law.
Aristotle already developed much of this theory of natural law. In his Ethics Aristotle distinguished
between natural justice and conventional justice. Some forms of behavior, he said, are wrong only after a
law, has been made to regulate such behavior. It is wrong,
for example, to drive a vehicle at certain speeds only
because a speed limit has been set, but there is nothing in
nature that requires that vehicles travel at that speed.
Such a law, is therefore, not natural but conventional,
because the law was passed, there was nothing wrong with
travelling at speeds exceeding the new limit. On the other
hand, there are some laws that are derived from nature, so that the
behavior they are regulate has always been wrong, as in the case of
murder. But Aquinas did not limit his treatment of natural law to the
simple notion that in some way human reason is able to discover the
natural basis for human conduct. Instead, he reasoned that if human
existence and nature can be fully understood only when seen in
relation to God, then natural law must be described in metaphysical
and theological terms.
Law, Aquinas says, has to do primarily with reason. Human reason is the standard of our actions
because it belongs to reason to direct our whole activity toward our end. Law consists of these rules and
measures of human acts and there is based on reason. But Aquinas argues that since God created all
things, human nature and the natural law are best understood as the product of God’s wisdom or reason.
From this standpoint Aquinas distinguishes between four kinds of law:

1. Eternal Law. This law refers to the fact that “the

whole community of the universe is governed by
Divine Reason. Because of this, the very notion of
the government of things in God the Ruler of the
universe, has the nature of a law. And since the
Divine Reason’s conception of things is not subject
to time but is eternal . . . therefore it is that this kind of law must be called natural.”
2. Natural Law. For Aquinas natural law consists of that portion of the eternal law that pertains
particularly to people. His reasoning is that “all things share somewhat of the eternal law . . . from its
being imprinted on them” and from this all things “derive their respective inclinations to their proper
acts and ends.” This is particularly true of people, because our rational capacity “has a share of the
Eternal Reason, whereby it has a natural
inclination to its proper act and end.” And,
Aquinas says, “this participation of the
eternal law in the rational creature is called
the natural law,” and again, “the natural law
is nothing else than the rational creature’s
participation in the eternal law.” We have
already noted the basic precepts of the natural law as being the preservation of life, propagation and
education of offspring, and pursuit of truth and a peaceful society. Thus, the natural law consists of
broad general principles that reflect God’s intentions for people in creation.

3. Human Law. This refers to the specific statutes of governments. These statutes or human laws are
derived from the general precepts of natural law. Just as “we draw conclusions of the various
sciences” from “naturally known indemonstrable principles,” so also “from the precepts of the natural
law . . . human reason needs to proceed to the more particular determination of certain matters.”
And “these particular determinations, devised by human reason, are called human laws.” What was
so far-reaching about this conception of human law was that it repudiated the notion that a law is a
law only because it is decreed by a sovereign. Aquinas argued that what gives a rule the character of
law is its moral dimension, its conformity
with the precepts of natural law, and its
agreement with the moral law. Taking
Augustine’s formula, namely, that “that
which is just seems to be no law at all,”
Aquinas said that “every human law has
just so much of the nature of law, as it is
derived from the law of nat ure.” But, he
adds, “if in any point it deflects from the
 law of nature, it is no longer a law but a perversion of law.” Such laws no longer bind in conscience
but are sometimes obeyed to prevent an even greater evil. Aquinas went further than simply denying
the character of human law that violated the natural moral law; such a command, he said, should not
be obeyed. Some laws, he said, “may be unjust through being opposed to the Divine God: such are
the laws of tyrants inducing to idolatry, or to anything else contrary to the Divine Law.” He concluded
that “laws of this kind must nowise be observed, because . . . we ought to obey God rather than human
beings.”

4. Divine Law. The function of law, Aquinas said, is to direct people to their proper end. Since we are
ordained to an end of eternal happiness, in addition to our temporal happiness, there must be a kind
of law that can direct us to that supernatural end. Here in particular, Aquinas parted company with
Aristotle, for Aristotle knew only about our natural purpose and end, and for this purpose the natural
law known by human reason was considered a sufficient guide. But the eternal happiness to which
people are ordained, said Aquinas, is “in proportion to a person’s natural faculty.” Therefore, “it was
necessary that besides the natural and the human law, people should be directed to their end by a
law given by God.” The divine law, then, is
available to us through revelation and is
found in the Scriptures. It is not the product
of human reason but is given to us through
God’s grace to ensure that we all know what
we must do to fulfill both our natural and,
especially, our supernatural ends. The
difference between the natural law and divine law is this: The natural law represents our rational
knowledge of the good by which the intellect directs our wills to control our appetites and passions.
This, in turn, leads us to fulfill our natural end by achieving the cardinal virtues of justice, temperance,
courage, and prudence. Through this we are directed to our supernatural ends and obtain the
theological virtues of faith, hope, and love (these virtues will later be thoroughly discussed in the
chapter on Virtue Ethics). These virtues are infused into human nature by God’s grace and are not the
result of our natural abilities. In this way Aquinas both completed and surpassed the naturalistic ethics
of Aristotle. He showed how the natural human desire to know God can be assured and how
revelation becomes the guide for reason. He also described the manner in which our highest nature
is perfected through God’s grace.
 APPLICATION

QUESTION: Suppose you are a vivid follower of Natural Law Theory. What will be your stand when it
comes to same-sex marriage? Explain thoroughly.
 GENERALIZATION

The following are the important key points discussed in this module:

Appetites – may be: (1) concupiscent appetite, which we perceive object as pleasurable and good; or (2)
irascible appetite, which we perceive object as harmful, painful, or bad.
Happiness – is connected closely with our end or purpose. And to achieve happiness, we must fulfill our
purpose.
Human nature – provides the ingredients of our moral experience.
Preservation of life – we are under a basic natural obligation to protect our lives and health.
Propagation of species – forms the basis of the union of wife and husband.
Reason – a human faculty which knows what is right and what is wrong and can direct the will.
Search for truth – our natural capacity to know reality.
Senses – may be (1) external senses, such as: sight, taste, smell, hear, and touch; and (2) internal senses,
such as: memory, imagination, and common-sense.
Supernatural end – the perfect happiness is found not in created things but in God, who is the supreme
good.
Will – is the agency that inclines a person toward the achievement of good.
 EVALUATION

Choose the correct answer for each item.

1. Like Plato, Thomas Aquinas considered ethics a quest for happiness.

a. True
b. False
2. For Aquinas, people could achieve virtue and happiness by fulfilling their natural capacities or end.
a. True
b. False
3. For Aquinas, Aristotle's ethics is complete that is why the former followed the latter's philosophy.
a. True
b. False
4. It is enough for us simply to be human and to exercise our natural functions and abilities in order
to achieve perfect happiness.
a. True
b. False
5. This certain level of knowledge about sensible objects makes us perceive the latter as pleasurable
and good.
a. Irascible appetite
b. Hunger appetite
c. Concupiscent appetite
d. Sensational appetite
6. This certain level of knowledge about sensible objects makes us perceive the latter as harmful,
painful or bad.
a. Irascible appetite
b. Hunger appetite
c. Concupiscent appetite
d. Sensational appetite
7. The appropriate object of the intellect is:
a. Knowledge
b. Wisdom
c. Truth
d. Reasoning
8. The will by itself can always make the right move and decision.
a. True
b. False
9. The intellect is the final source of knowledge.
a. True
b. False
10. Which of the following does not include in moral constitution?
a. Sensuality
b. Appetites
c. Emotion
d. Will
e. Reason
11. The civil laws are considered as what kind of law?
a. Eternal Law
b. Natural Law
c. Human Law
d. Divine Law
12. 1 + 1 = 2 is what kind of law?
a. Eternal Law
b. Natural Law
c. Human Law
 d. Divine Law
13. Preserving life is what kind of law in relation to man?
a. Eternal Law
b. Natural Law
c. Human Law
d. Divine Law
14. The commandments of God are what kind of law?
a. Eternal Law
b. Natural Law
c. Human Law
d. Divine Law
15. Traffic laws are what kind of law?
a. Eternal Law
b. Natural Law
c. Human Law
d. Divine Law
 ACTIVITY ASSIGNMENT
(Genesis 38:6-9)

There is a passage in the Bible where Onan is

condemned and killed by God: At that time, it was
the custom in the tribe that when a man died, his
brother would be responsible for his wife and take
her as another wife in order to continue the tribe.
Onan went into the tent and had sex with his dead
brother's wife but pulled out of her and spilled his
semen on the ground. He was condemned and
killed by God for doing so.

QUESTION: Was Onan condemned by God for pulling out (withdrawal method) and spilling his semen
on the ground while having sex with his dead brother’s wife? How does Natural Law apply in this
situation? Explain.
REFERENCE:

• Aquinas, Thomas. Basic Writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, ed. Anton Pegis (New York: Random
House, 1945).
• Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiciae, ed., Thomas Gilby (London, 1963-75), 60 vols.
• Aquinas, Thomas. Treatise on Happiness (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1964).
• Finnis, John. Is homosexual conduct wrong? Disintegrity. (The New Republic, November 15, 1993).
• Bonnette, Dennis. Abortion Ethics: Natural Law vs. Naturalism. (Strange Notions, January 14,
2010).