Theses on Reformed Natural Law

Status
Not open for further replies.

RamistThomist

Puritanboard Clerk
The only sources I used were Thomas and Althusius. Other Reformed thinkers held to natural law, and I will list them in the comments.

  1. There is an objective moral order to which we have cognitive access.
  2. Natural law is a participation, however indirectly, in the Divine Mind. (See this chart).
  3. Law is a rule and measure of acts directed towards the common good (Thomas, ST I-II, q.90).
  4. Politics is the art of associating men for the purpose of establishing, cultivating, and conserving social life (Althusius).
  5. God willed that each need the service and aid of others in order that friendship would bind all together and no one would consider another to be valueless (Althusius).
  6. Ownership of a realm belongs to the estates and administration of it belongs to the king [or relevant executive figure] (Ibid).
  7. Human law is not identified with natural law. It is practical reason. Human law is directed towards particulars (Thomas, Ibid, q.91).
  8. Natural law is unchangeable in its first principles, but changeable in its proximate conclusions (Ibid, 94).
  9. Thomist natural law employed a grace perfects nature scheme. It is not clear if Reformed natural law needs such a scheme.
  10. Moral virtue of rendering to others their due (ST 2a 2ae. 57.1). It is a balance of equity.
More could be written, but that would make it unwieldy. Early natural law had the state punishing heretics. Is this part of the esse of natural law? Not necessarily. As noted in Thesis 8, punishing heretics is a proximate conclusion and not binding.
 
Thanks for these. A question I’ve been pondering: With regard to terminology in the literature, is there a distinction between “natural law” and “light of nature/natural light”? Muller’s dictionary entry for lex naturalis doesn’t indicate anything one way or the other. Curious as to your thoughts.
 
Thanks for these. A question I’ve been pondering: With regard to terminology in the literature, is there a distinction between “natural law” and “light of nature/natural light”? Muller’s dictionary entry for lex naturalis doesn’t indicate anything one way or the other. Curious as to your thoughts.

Natural law is a law. It deals with actions directed towards the common good. Natural light = natural revelation.
 
The only sources I used were Thomas and Althusius. Other Reformed thinkers held to natural law, and I will list them in the comments.

  1. There is an objective moral order to which we have cognitive access.
  2. Natural law is a participation, however indirectly, in the Divine Mind. (See this chart).
  3. Law is a rule and measure of acts directed towards the common good (Thomas, ST I-II, q.90).
  4. Politics is the art of associating men for the purpose of establishing, cultivating, and conserving social life (Althusius).
  5. God willed that each need the service and aid of others in order that friendship would bind all together and no one would consider another to be valueless (Althusius).
  6. Ownership of a realm belongs to the estates and administration of it belongs to the king [or relevant executive figure] (Ibid).
  7. Human law is not identified with natural law. It is practical reason. Human law is directed towards particulars (Thomas, Ibid, q.91).
  8. Natural law is unchangeable in its first principles, but changeable in its proximate conclusions (Ibid, 94).
  9. Thomist natural law employed a grace perfects nature scheme. It is not clear if Reformed natural law needs such a scheme.
  10. Moral virtue of rendering to others their due (ST 2a 2ae. 57.1). It is a balance of equity.
More could be written, but that would make it unwieldy. Early natural law had the state punishing heretics. Is this part of the esse of natural law? Not necessarily. As noted in Thesis 8, punishing heretics is a proximate conclusion and not binding.
The claim is made in a linked blogpost from another thread: “…the Natural Law / Two Kingdoms issue (Radical Two Kingdom in some critics thoughts)…also had to do with the same root issue of Law / Grace. …its root..goes back to the hermeneutic some Professors are using that is more Lutheran than Reformed concerning the Covenant of Grace and the Mosaic Covenant.” I’m not sure such a charge speaks directly to your thesis, but I thought I’d put it out there…..

What is (common) good? Do we all maintain a universal conception of objective moral order? Is this akin to the golden rule of due no harm to another (of which the Hippocratic Oath is a sub-set)?
 
Last edited:
What is (common) good? Do we all maintain a universal conception of objective moral order? Is this akin to the golden rule of due no harm to another (of which the Hippocratic Oath is a sub-set)?

The common good, loosely considered, is the relative peace, the proximate end, to which the earthly city is ordered.
 
DA738F22-E9FA-4C8F-8A57-FD4325A3737E.png
So a natural law system is dependent on the created rational mind….

This is where I struggle. I think the ‘natural’ default is a Jeffersonian view of man. While in most instances the Reformed view requires a spiritual awakening/illumination.

Are you sure Calvin was close to Aquinas regarding the rational mind, even as much as it pertains to natural law theory? Maybe I’m seeing Calvin through the lens of Calvinism…. I guess in Calvin’s Geneva a natural law system was pretty workable as there was a like-mindedness in the civil establishment that he helped shape…..

I’m basically thinking out loud.

To be honest, by looking at these issues in the modern day, a Reformed faith perspective on these matters seems pretty radical, at least considering today’s world.
 
Last edited:
Some interesting, relevant reads via mere orthodoxy:



 
Are you sure Calvin was close to Aquinas regarding the rational mind, even as much as it pertains to natural law theory? Maybe I’m seeing Calvin through the lens of Calvinism…. I guess in Calvin’s Geneva a natural law system was pretty workable as there was a like-mindedness in the civil establishment that he helped shape…..

The magistrate helped, but not as much as one might think. Calvin was usually at odds with the magistrate on theology (reader take note). And as Geneva (and Europe) broke free from Rome's teaching on marriage and divorce, there was a lot of confusion on whether one was still married or not (see Shakespeare's play Measure for Measure). This book on Beza's ethics illustrates how Geneva was sometimes a sexual free for all.
 
What role does regeneration play in discerning natural law? Does a regenerate person come to more sound conclusions or is it really irrelevant to this discussion?
 
What role does regeneration play in discerning natural law? Does a regenerate person come to more sound conclusions or is it really irrelevant to this discussion?
I would say today for sure! In Calvin’s day, it probably wasn’t as much of a problem…. At least, to the extent we see today. Imagine trying to establish a Reformed conception of natural law. How would it fit with the modern-day gnostics and their LGBTs and CRTs… which has probably been built on an enlightenment-era Jeffersonian interpretation of natural law….


I have lately by accident got a sight of a single volume, (the 3d.) of the Abbé Barruel’s ‘Antisocial conspiracy,’ which gives me the first idea I have ever had of what is meant by the Illuminatism, against which ‘illuminati Morse’ as he is now called, and his ecclesiastical & monarchical associates have been making such a hue & cry. ….
Wishaupt believes that to promote this perfection of the human character was the object of Jesus Christ. that his intention was simply to reinstate natural religion, & by diffusing the light of his morality, to teach us to govern ourselves. his precepts are the love of god & love of our neighbor. and by teaching innocence of conduct, he expected to place men in their natural state of liberty & equality. he says, no one ever laid a surer foundation for liberty than our grand master, Jesus of Nazareth. he believes the Freemasons were originally possessed of the true principles & object of Christianity, and have still preserved some of them by tradition, but much disfigured. the means he proposes to effect this improvement of human nature are ‘to enlighten men, to correct their morals & inspire them with benevolence. secure of our success, sais he, we abstain from violent commotions. to have foreseen the happiness of posterity & to have prepared it by irreproacheable means, suffices for our felicity. this tranquility of our consciences is not troubled by the reproach of aiming at the ruin or overthrow of states or thrones.’ as Wishaupt lived under the tyranny of a despot & priests, he knew that caution was necessary even in spreading information, and the principles of pure morality. he proposed therefore to lead the Freemasons to adopt this object, and to make the objects of their institution, the diffusion of1 science & virtue. he proposed to initiate new members into this body by gradations proportioned to his fears of the thunderbolts of tyranny. this has given an air of mystery to his views, was the foundation of his banishment & the subversion of the Masonic order, and is the colour for the ravings against him of Robinson, Barruel & Morse, whose real fears are that the craft would be endangered by the spreading of information reason & natural morality among men.—this subject being new to me, I have imagined that if it be so to you also, you may recieve the same satisfaction in seeing, which I have had in forming the Analysis of it: and I believe you will think with me that if Wishaupt had written here, where no secrecy is necessary in our endeavors to render men wise & virtuous, he would not have thought of any secret machinery for that purpose: as Godwin, if he had written in Germany, might probably also have thought secrecy & mystycism prudent.
 
Last edited:
What role does regeneration play in discerning natural law? Does a regenerate person come to more sound conclusions or is it really irrelevant to this discussion?

Ideally, yes. In practice, not necessarily. Cicero was one of the greatest natural law theorists of all time.
 
What role does regeneration play in discerning natural law? Does a regenerate person come to more sound conclusions or is it really irrelevant to this discussion?

Dort touches on this.

There remain, however, in man since the fall, the glimmerings of natural light, whereby he retains some knowledge of God, of natural things, and of the differences between good and evil, and discovers some regard for virtue, good order in society, and for maintaining an orderly external deportment. But so far is this light of nature from being sufficient to bring him to a saving knowledge of God and to true conversion, that he is incapable of using it aright even in things natural and civil. Nay, further, this light, such as it is, man in various ways renders wholly polluted and holds it in unrighteousness, by doing which he becomes inexcusable before God.
 
Dort touches on this.

There remain, however, in man since the fall, the glimmerings of natural light, whereby he retains some knowledge of God, of natural things, and of the differences between good and evil, and discovers some regard for virtue, good order in society, and for maintaining an orderly external deportment. But so far is this light of nature from being sufficient to bring him to a saving knowledge of God and to true conversion, that he is incapable of using it aright even in things natural and civil. Nay, further, this light, such as it is, man in various ways renders wholly polluted and holds it in unrighteousness, by doing which he becomes inexcusable before God.
It’s telling…. Only the threat of punishment will really keep the masses in check. And now when the inmates are running the asylum even the glimmering light is extinguished.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top