[An e-letter extract from a correspondence with a friend]
Bill,
I don't disagree with what you say here. In fact, it's
well-stated, rationally, as usual. The bit I take umbrage over is your subtle
attempt to put the Christian God in a box, where you write:
The natural law that sprang from the Christian God you allude to
arises from the same innate human reasoning ability to scruple that which is
true and just in nature…while simultaneously possessing the immutable qualities
that imbue virtuous constitutions with an unerring ability to guide societies
toward justice and the common good.
It's perhaps better stated that natural
law flows through the natural order, as demonstrated in nature, with
its source being a supernatural or spiritual one. It is immaterial what a
certain man at a certain time considers to be his God (or even gods). Thus,
Cicero, being a good Roman citizen, likely believed in Apollo, the Roman god of
law and order. Or it could be that he was a man ahead of his age and was able
to think in a less mythological/anthropomorphic and more abstract mental way.
Whatever the case may be, America's Founding Fathers were at least
nominal Christians, even if they were creatures of the Enlightenment's
infatuation with reason over faith. In fact, even if they were all
"deists" (as is commonly asserted) and they were thinking of
their "God of Reason" when mentioning God in the Declaration of
Independence, would this be much different than the example of Cicero in the
passage from De Legibus[i]?
What I have read and believe to be true is that every
thinking man of that era had two books on his shelf: The Bible and
Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England. (Or said
differently, 18th Century American Colonists were hardly consulting
the Talmud or the Quran.)
As someone who believes in God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, I
prefer to put it the same way that Novalis put it: "There is no religion
that is not Christianity."[ii]
And so if you have a bias against Christians or Christianity or
those who simply follow the precepts of the Bible and the gospels of Jesus, you
might look for reason or philosophy as
sufficient to inform you of the source of natural law. But neither reason nor
philosophy created anything, as I and others of faith would put it. (And
with this minor opus I rest my case.)
I am a neophyte American State National, who has recently
self-revoked (with the "permission" of the Maryland Court of Appeals)
his Esquire status, and is struggling to overcome his conditioning in the
law as taught in American law schools. Even at 67-years of age I am
re-learning the nature of law, as the blinders are falling off and I start to
apprehend the real common law. It's so fascinating that I
must amend my doctoral dissertation[iii]
in order to make that part of my life's work more comprehensible and complete.
I hope that I am able to summon the energy-and-passion-of-a-younger-man to do
so.
Thanks for being a good friend and patient correspondent. If I
have misconstrued what you so eloquently stated in your last email (including the
red eyes of Cicero due to occasional inebriation “if he had any fondness
whatsoever for the local Tuscan vintages”) I apologize in advance.
[i] “True law is right reason in agreement with
nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons
to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions. And it
does not law its commands or prohibitions upon good men in vain, though neither
have any effect on the wicked. It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it
allowable to attempt to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish
it entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and
we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it. And
there will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens, or different laws now
and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all
nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is, God,
over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator, and its
enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his
human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst
penalties, even if he escapes what is commonly considered punishment.”
De Republica, De Legibus, trans. Clinton W. Keyes, Loeb Classical Library (1928; reprint, 1970).
[ii] Georg Friedrich Philipp von Hardenberg (“Novalis”)
“was the most significant representative of German romanticism at the end of
the eighteenth century. He was a poet, a writer, a scientist, a thinker and
philosopher who was profoundly influenced by Fichte and Kant.” Douglas Gabriel,
Spirit Awakening Through Novalis, Our Spirit: Reflections, https://neoanthroposophy.com/2018/01/04/spirit-awakening-through-novalis/
[iii] The Odyssey of the Western Legal Tradition: Integral Jurisprudence — Toward the Self-Transcendence of Deficient-Mental Legal Culture, (2006) 321 pages (Order No. 3238290, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses). Abstract and table of contents are freely accessible at: https://search.proquest.com/docview/304955482
