Natural Law for Centuries the Dominant Philosophical

Natural Law For centuries the dominant philosophical thought on the issue of natural law was dominated by the Catholic Church's theocracy (Gula, 1989). Natural law is the idea that law exists that is set by nature and that therefore it is universally validity (Cochrane, 1857). The first great philosopher to establish the early views on natural law was St. Augustine. St.

Augustine's views on natural law were to develop over time into what is now called classic naturalism and were based on the concept that law cannot be fully articulated without some reference to moral notions (Augustine, 2005). Augustine believed and argued that the laws of nature were dictated by God and therefore were superior to any other form of law. Such laws, as prescribed by God, were universal and timeless and that any man-made laws were valid if, and only if, they were in accordance with the laws of God.

For St. Augustine, all laws, either man-made or God given, received all authority and legitimacy from God (Augustine, The City of God, 1994). Simply stated, St. Augustine's natural law theory can be broken down into two essential elements: 1) there can be no legally binding standards that conflicts with the natural law; and 2) all valid laws derive their force and authority from the natural law.

For Augustine, an unjust law was no law at all; however, he also believed that the coercive authority of the state arose as a result of man's tendency to sin. St. Augustine was the first Catholic philosophy to conceptualize the idea of original sin and he argued that because of original sin God installed obedience to the state as a form of punishment. Obedience, therefore, was a Christian duty Contrasting with St. Augustine's viewpoint is the neo-naturalism of modern day philosopher John Finnis. Finnis does not believe that St.

Augustine's views provided an adequate justification for the existence of natural law. Finnis believed that St. Augustine and the classical natural law theorists were not concerned with providing a conceptual account of legal validity but were more concerned with explaining the moral force of law (Bix, 1995). Finnis believes that the essential function of law is to provide a legal justification for the actions of the state. The state must have a method of enforcing its authority and the law provides this vehicle. Unlike St.

Augustine who believed that an unjust law was no law, Finnis believes that an unjust law can still be legally valid without providing an adequate justification for the use of state coercive power. Without such justification the law would not necessarily be obligatory. For Finnis, an unjust law is legally binding but is not fully law (Finnis, 1980). St. Augustine's philosophy of natural law was based heavily on his religious beliefs. Augustine rejected human reasoning as a source of intellectual understanding.

Instead, he believed that all illumination and wisdom was divinely inspired. Augustine failed to make any distinction between theology and philosophy and the only law was God based. Augustine would argue that one can disregard any law that is not God-based because it is not a law. Because of the time in which he wrote, the mid 4th century, Augustine believed that it was no longer possible for man to live by natural law alone and that it was now necessary that man begin to live by divine law.

Finnis, on the other hand, attempts to base his theory of natural law on essentially the same basis as Augustine but he eliminates the presumption that such natural law is divinely inspired. Finnis bases his theory on the concept that all men desire to pursue basic goods and that this pursuit for these basic goods is what motivates men to act well. He believed that a person will act morally as long as he does not act in a way which directly harms one of the basic goods.

The basic goods for Finnis were 1) human life (health and procreation; 2) knowledge and esthetic appreciation; 3) skilled performance; 4) self-integration; 5) authenticity / practical reasonableness; 6) justice and friendship; 7) religion/holiness. Through his pursuit of basic goods theory Finnis is leading contemporary natural law proponents back toward the ideals offered by Augustine with some important and significant differences (Porter, 1996). Finnis views just laws as being discoverable or found. He does not believe that they can be created by a bill or rights.

Because Finnis believes strongly that laws can be discoverable he also believes strongly in the common law where laws evolve over time toward a fair and just result. Although their underlying rationale might differ the philosophies of Finnis and Augustine are not remarkably different (Curran, 1999). Living centuries apart.