Skip to main content
Essay Undergraduate 649 words

Aquinas and MLK on Natural Law, Human Law, and Justice

~4 min read
Abstract

This paper examines the philosophical perspectives of St. Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther King Jr. on natural law and human law, focusing on their shared understanding of justice. It outlines Aquinas's conception of natural law as divine reason directing the universe, and his view that human law is a rational participation in that natural law. The paper connects these ideas to King's arguments against segregation laws in Birmingham, drawing a parallel between the two thinkers' insistence that unjust laws contradict a higher moral order. It concludes by reflecting on the fallibility of human law and the ongoing tension between universal natural law and culturally contingent legal interpretation.

Key Takeaways
  • Introduction: Framing natural law, human law, and justice
  • Aquinas on Natural Law and Human Law: Aquinas defines natural and human law
  • The Purpose and Telos of Law: Law's teleological function in Aquinas
  • Martin Luther King Jr. and the Justice of Natural Law: King applies natural law to segregation
  • The Fallibility of Human Law and the Reinterpretation of Justice: Human law's cultural limits and interpretive drift
  • Conclusion: Natural law as ongoing standard of justice
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples

What makes this paper effective

  • The paper draws a clear conceptual bridge between two historically distant thinkers — Aquinas and King — showing how natural law theory applies to concrete political struggles like desegregation.
  • It distinguishes between natural law and human law precisely and consistently, grounding the distinction in both theological and practical terms.
  • The concluding reflection on the interpretive fallibility of human law adds analytical depth, moving beyond summary to critical observation.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper demonstrates comparative political philosophy: it identifies a shared conceptual framework (natural law as the standard of justice) across two thinkers from different eras, then uses that framework to evaluate the limits of human law. This technique — finding convergent principles across distinct intellectual traditions — is a hallmark of political theory essays.

Structure breakdown

The paper opens with a brief framing of natural and human law, then presents Aquinas's theory in depth, including his teleological view of law's purpose. King's Letter from Birmingham Jail is introduced as a practical application of the same principles. The final section broadens the argument to critique how human law's dependence on cultural and majority consensus undermines its claim to universal justice. Citations from Ebenstein (2000) and Donnelly (1980) support the theoretical claims.

Introduction

Natural law and human laws are instruments that provide order and justice. They are implemented by government and formulated by authorities based on the common good of the community, guided by the will of God. A law may be just or unjust. This paper explores the views of St. Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther King Jr. on the relationship between natural law and human law, and what each thinker considers to be just.

Aquinas on Natural Law and Human Law

Aquinas contends that natural law prescribes that good be done and evil avoided, that man be sociable, that covenants be honored, that the truth of God be known, and that offense not be committed. Natural law is the wisdom of God — divine reason directing the universe toward its end. It is what subjects all things to divine providence. Human law, on the other hand, is the rational participation in natural law concerned with practical matters rather than speculation. It is a true law only if it partakes of right reason and is derived from eternal law (Ebenstein, 2000).

The Purpose and Telos of Law

In relation to the concept of natural law, Aquinas addresses the purpose and objective of law. He argued that everything is viewed as having its end — a telos — toward which it is naturally inclined and by which its essential nature is defined. The telos provides a natural standard of value and excellence: that which fosters the realization of the telos is good, and that which inhibits it is evil. The function of law, therefore, is to make men good — to realize the natural ends of man (Donnelly, 1980: 521).

2 locked sections · 215 words
Sign up to read the full analysis
Martin Luther King Jr. and the Justice of Natural Law60 words
Martin Luther King Jr. held a perspective closely related to that of Aquinas. In his…
The Fallibility of Human Law and the Reinterpretation of Justice155 words
What makes natural law questionable is when human laws claim to be based upon it. Inspired by natural law, human laws are highly interpretive, and their…
Read the full paper →
Plus 130,000+ examples & all writing tools

Conclusion

Natural law is the highest form of law because it is grounded in universality; its provisions seek to preserve life, protect human rights, and uphold the truth. More importantly, as the philosophies of both St. Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther King Jr. affirm, natural law is just. Human law and natural law together reflect our continuous redefinition of justice and of what is good for the community — a redefinition that must always be measured against the enduring standard of natural law.

References

Ebenstein, W. (2000). Great Political Thinkers: Plato to the Present. United States: Thomas Wadsworth.

Donnelly, J. (1980). "Natural Law and Rights in Aquinas's Political Thought." Western Political Quarterly, Volume 33, Number 4, December 1980. Utah: University of Utah.

Key Concepts in This Paper
Natural Law Human Law Thomas Aquinas Martin Luther King Jr. Telos Divine Reason Justice Common Good Segregation Laws Legal Interpretation
Cite This Paper
PaperDue. (2026). Aquinas and MLK on Natural Law, Human Law, and Justice. PaperDue. https://www.paperdue.com/study-guide/aquinas-mlk-natural-law-justice-17543

Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.