OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 22, 2014, 03:52:48 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Natural Law in the Abstract  (Read 2813 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #45 on: May 09, 2013, 11:19:11 PM »

Isa, do you not believe in the "law written on their hearts" to which St. Paul refers?
I'm not Isa but I think the point of all this critique of "natural law" is that the concept is inherently religious ad not at all "neutral" or whatever other quasi-synonymous term its apologists use. Like there is no  big and obvious "natural" case against the use of a condom by a married couple somehow written in the physical structure of the universe that physicists can can observe in the same way as the law of gravity or whatever.
I wouldn't say it is religious, but it does presuppose the existence of God.
No, it does not.  The Stoics, from whom you got it, worked without one.
For Aquinas, God's existence can be demonstrated by reason. I realize that that is not a popular view on this forum, but at least in Aquinas' mind, (and St. Paul's for that matter), one does not have to belong to a particular religion to have knowldge of good and evil. That doesn't mean that that knowledge comes easy.

That being said, Aquinas argues that because it is easy to make errors in our moral reasoning, God gave us divine revelation of the moral law in the scriptures, particularly in the ten commandments.
hence those of us who have the Law and the Gospel have no use for it, as the Fathers indicate above.
The Catholic view of Natural Law does depend on the existence of God. That is a clear indication that the Catholic view is different from the Stoic view.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #46 on: May 10, 2013, 09:32:50 AM »

Isa, do you not believe in the "law written on their hearts" to which St. Paul refers?
I'm not Isa but I think the point of all this critique of "natural law" is that the concept is inherently religious ad not at all "neutral" or whatever other quasi-synonymous term its apologists use. Like there is no  big and obvious "natural" case against the use of a condom by a married couple somehow written in the physical structure of the universe that physicists can can observe in the same way as the law of gravity or whatever.
I wouldn't say it is religious, but it does presuppose the existence of God.
No, it does not.  The Stoics, from whom you got it, worked without one.
For Aquinas, God's existence can be demonstrated by reason. I realize that that is not a popular view on this forum, but at least in Aquinas' mind, (and St. Paul's for that matter), one does not have to belong to a particular religion to have knowldge of good and evil. That doesn't mean that that knowledge comes easy.

That being said, Aquinas argues that because it is easy to make errors in our moral reasoning, God gave us divine revelation of the moral law in the scriptures, particularly in the ten commandments.
hence those of us who have the Law and the Gospel have no use for it, as the Fathers indicate above.
The Catholic view of Natural Law does depend on the existence of God. That is a clear indication that the Catholic view is different from the Stoic view.
Only in the way that the Vatican's Scholasticism differs from Islam's.

But that, like your comment, isn't on point: those of us who have the Law and the Gospel have no use for any "Natural Law" except for polemics/apologetics against non-believers.  And even then, that Natural Law differs from the Vatican view of Natural Law.

But back to you view of Natural Law: evidently it doesn't depend on a God, because during the course of the Renaissance and the transformation of the West's "Natural Law" into its International Law and Human Rights etc., He was factored out of it.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2013, 09:35:44 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #47 on: May 10, 2013, 04:52:04 PM »

Isa, do you not believe in the "law written on their hearts" to which St. Paul refers?
I'm not Isa but I think the point of all this critique of "natural law" is that the concept is inherently religious ad not at all "neutral" or whatever other quasi-synonymous term its apologists use. Like there is no  big and obvious "natural" case against the use of a condom by a married couple somehow written in the physical structure of the universe that physicists can can observe in the same way as the law of gravity or whatever.
I wouldn't say it is religious, but it does presuppose the existence of God.
No, it does not.  The Stoics, from whom you got it, worked without one.
For Aquinas, God's existence can be demonstrated by reason. I realize that that is not a popular view on this forum, but at least in Aquinas' mind, (and St. Paul's for that matter), one does not have to belong to a particular religion to have knowldge of good and evil. That doesn't mean that that knowledge comes easy.

That being said, Aquinas argues that because it is easy to make errors in our moral reasoning, God gave us divine revelation of the moral law in the scriptures, particularly in the ten commandments.
hence those of us who have the Law and the Gospel have no use for it, as the Fathers indicate above.
The Catholic view of Natural Law does depend on the existence of God. That is a clear indication that the Catholic view is different from the Stoic view.
Only in the way that the Vatican's Scholasticism differs from Islam's.

But that, like your comment, isn't on point: those of us who have the Law and the Gospel have no use for any "Natural Law" except for polemics/apologetics against non-believers.  And even then, that Natural Law differs from the Vatican view of Natural Law.

But back to you view of Natural Law: evidently it doesn't depend on a God, because during the course of the Renaissance and the transformation of the West's "Natural Law" into its International Law and Human Rights etc., He was factored out of it.
Isa, the Catholic view of Natural Law does depend on God. You should read the Summa theologiae. It specifically states that it all about God's eternal plan. Any natural law view which does not require belief in God is not part of the Catholic Natural Law tradition.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #48 on: August 24, 2013, 02:23:29 PM »

Isa, do you not believe in the "law written on their hearts" to which St. Paul refers?
I'm not Isa but I think the point of all this critique of "natural law" is that the concept is inherently religious ad not at all "neutral" or whatever other quasi-synonymous term its apologists use. Like there is no  big and obvious "natural" case against the use of a condom by a married couple somehow written in the physical structure of the universe that physicists can can observe in the same way as the law of gravity or whatever.
I wouldn't say it is religious, but it does presuppose the existence of God.
No, it does not.  The Stoics, from whom you got it, worked without one.
For Aquinas, God's existence can be demonstrated by reason. I realize that that is not a popular view on this forum, but at least in Aquinas' mind, (and St. Paul's for that matter), one does not have to belong to a particular religion to have knowldge of good and evil. That doesn't mean that that knowledge comes easy.

That being said, Aquinas argues that because it is easy to make errors in our moral reasoning, God gave us divine revelation of the moral law in the scriptures, particularly in the ten commandments.
hence those of us who have the Law and the Gospel have no use for it, as the Fathers indicate above.
The Catholic view of Natural Law does depend on the existence of God. That is a clear indication that the Catholic view is different from the Stoic view.
Only in the way that the Vatican's Scholasticism differs from Islam's.

But that, like your comment, isn't on point: those of us who have the Law and the Gospel have no use for any "Natural Law" except for polemics/apologetics against non-believers.  And even then, that Natural Law differs from the Vatican view of Natural Law.

But back to you view of Natural Law: evidently it doesn't depend on a God, because during the course of the Renaissance and the transformation of the West's "Natural Law" into its International Law and Human Rights etc., He was factored out of it.
Isa, the Catholic view of Natural Law does depend on God. You should read the Summa theologiae. It specifically states that it all about God's eternal plan. Any natural law view which does not require belief in God is not part of the Catholic Natural Law tradition.
Alas!  The Summa Theologiae depends on Aristotle a lot, and he did not require a belief in God.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
davillas
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 89



« Reply #49 on: August 24, 2013, 02:32:17 PM »

There is a good essay on this topic : " Unspeakable ethics unnatural law " written by professor Arthur Allen Leff. You can find the pdf online.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.063 seconds with 32 queries.