God and Human Nature
I. The Good for Human Beings: Christian Perspective
- A. Augustine: Platonic
Themes Transformed
- B. Aquinas:
Aristotelian Themes Transformed
II. Law According to St. Thomas
- A. What is Law?
- B. Eternal Law
- C. Natural Law and
Divine Law
- D. Human Law
III. The Good and the Obligatory: Intrinsic and Extrinsic
Teleology
in Morals
- A. The Problem of
the Origin of Moral
Obligation
- B. Three Positions
- C. Three Test Cases
- D. Intrinsic and
Extrinsic Teleology
IA. Augustine:
Platonic Themes Transformed
- The Remedy
- Purification and justification through the grace merited
for us
by Jesus Christ, who opens up for us (i) a new and ineffable vision of
beatitude as genuine and perfect filial friendship with our
transcendent Creator, now revealed to us as our loving and gracious Dad
(Abba) and (ii) the hope of attaining this
beatitude, with the
help of God's grace, by "losing our lives" in supernatural love of God
and neighbor. By contrast, all the "world" has to offer is
one or another form of despair.
- Contrast with the Platonists:
- Faith vs. understanding
- Obedience and humility vs.self-sufficiency
and pride (Confessions
6.11 and 7.9 and 7.21)
- Dangers of intellectual prowess vs.
flourishing
available only to the gifted (Gnosticism)
IB. Aquinas: Aristotelian
Themes Transformed
The structure of St. Thomas's General Moral Theory (Summa
Theologiae 1-2):
- I. The ultimate end of human action (ST
1-2.1-5)
- II. The means to the ultimate end--human acts and
their
principles: (ST 1-2.6-114)
- A. Human acts in themselves
- 1. Properly human acts (ST
1-2.6-21)
- 2. Passions (ST 1-2.22-48)
- B. The principles of human action
- 1. Intrinsic principles of action:
- a. Habits (ST 1-2.49-54)
- b. Virtues (ST 1-2.55-70))
- c. Vice and Sin (ST
1-2.71-89)
- 2. Extrinsic principles of action:
- a. Law (ST 1-2.90-108)
- b. Grace (ST 1-2.109-114)
The ultimate end: human happiness, felicity, flourishing,
beatitude:
- Question: Which good (or collection of
goods) satisfies
Aristotle's definition of the good for
human beings, viz., the good such that possession of it in the
appropriate way fulfills all
well-ordered human desires?
- Possible Answers (either by themselves or in
combination with
each other):
- External goods: wealth, honor (good
reputation), glory
(fame), power, friendship
- Internal goods:
- Goods of the body: longevity,
health, good looks,
physical strength,
athletic prowess, food and drink, clothing, housing, high level of
physical
comfort, various sorts of sensual pleasure (including sexual pleasure),
etc.
- Goods of the soul: intellectual
and artistic
ability and
accomplishment, moral and intellectual virtue, recreation, religious
faith, etc.
- St. Thomas's Conclusions
- No created (finite) good or collection of such goods
can give
us complete (perfect)
happiness in Aristotle's sense. (Note the distinction between perfect
(complete) and imperfect (incomplete) happiness.)
- Only the 'face-to-face' knowledge, love, and enjoyment
of God
can give us complete happiness.
- We can attain complete happiness, but
...
- not in this life
- not by our own natural powers
- not without rectitude of the will acting in accord
with
'right reason'
- not without supernatural grace, which gives us an
accurate intellectual understanding of our ultimate good and the hope
of attaining it by God's help through sacrificial love of the persons
of the Godhead and of everyone and everything else in our love of God.
IIA. What is Law?
- Law =
- Dictates of practical reason
- made for the common good
- by one who has care of the community
- and promulgated
- The effects of law:
- command
- prohibition
- permission
- punishment (sanctions)
- Note: Commands and prohibitions
impose obligations
IIB. Eternal Law
- Eternal Law = The divine wisdom insofar as it directs and governs all
the
actions and
movements of creatures, "moving all things to their due end".
- So Eternal Law = the order of divine providence
- All things participate in eternal
law by the natural
tendencies by which they are
moved to their ends
- Rational beings also participate in
eternal law by
their 'connatural' knowledge of those positive and
negative
moral precepts, conformity to which leads us toward the end built into
us by nature. These precepts constitute what is called natural
law.
Hence, this law is promulgated through our connatural knowledge, and it
is called 'natural' because obedience to it leads us toward the good
that we desire by nature.
IIC. Natural Law and
Divine (Revealed) Law
- Similarities:
- Natural law and divine law are both proper parts of
eternal
law
- Natural law and divine law are both concerned with the
direction of human beings
toward true human happiness (fulfillment, perfection, flourishing)
- Natural law and divine law are both 'participated in'
through
knowledge and
understanding
- Differences:
- In promulgation:
- Natural law is promulgated by means of our
connatural
knowledge of the
goods to which we are naturally inclined and of their contrary evils
- Divine law is promulgated through revelation, i.e.,
through Sacred Scripture
and the teachings of the Church
- In content:
- Natural law consists of ordinances that obligate us
to
act in accord with right
reason, i.e., in accord with those dictates of practical
reason
that lead us to genuine human flourishing or happiness. St. Thomas
divides natural law into levels of precepts according to (i) their
evidentness to reason (whether in general or to the wise) and (ii) the
ease with which they can be "blotted out of our hearts" by culpable
ignorance. The first level consists of the two great commandments to
love God above all things and our neighbor as ourselves. The second
level consists of the specification of the two great commandments in
precepts like those which are revealed in the Ten
Commandments
even though they can be known without revelation. The third level
consists of the further specifications which are evident to those who
have practical wisdom. (Note on conscience.)
- Divine law consists of ordinances, (i) some of
which
pertain to the order of nature and are thus in principle accessible to
natural (practical) reason, and (ii) some of which pertain to the
supernatural order of grace and are thus in principle inaccessible to
natural (practical) reason. St. Thomas divides divine law into (i) the
Old Law, whose primary motive is the fear of punishment and (ii) the
New Law, whose primary motive is sacrificial love of God and neighbor.
IID. Human Law
- Usefulness: Human law is useful mainly
as a way to compel
outward conformity to virtue
on the part of those who have not been made virtuous by good
upbringing.
- Legitimacy: Human laws are legitimate to
the extent that
they are "derived from," either
as implications of or specifications of, natural law
IIIA. The
Problem of the Origin of Moral
Obligation
- The following two theses appear to be in tension with one
another:
- (T1) What human beings ought morally to do and
not to do
is determined
by the standards of flourishing that are intrinsic to human nature and
dictated by right reason.
- (T2) What human beings ought morally to do and
not to do
is determined
by the obligations and prohibitions imposed by natural and divine law.
- Question: Suppose that God
either (i) did not
exist or (ii) issued no
commands and prohibitions or (iii) commanded me to torture you for fun:
Would it still be wrong for me to
torture you for fun?
IIIB. Three Positions
- STRONG DIVINE COMMAND THEORY:
- (T2) is true and (T1)
is false
- So God's decrees alone determine what human
beings ought
morally to do
and not to do, and it is only contingently true
that God's law
is in part a
natural law, i.e., a law that directs us to happiness as defined by our
nature.
- Comments:
- Answer to the above question: NO!! What we see here is the severance of moral theory from the classical model, where the basic moral motive is happiness.
- Two senses of 'ought': intrinsic and extrinsic
- Conformity to God's will is the only moral
motivation for action. Whether it leads to happiness of any
sort in this world is immaterial.
- Heavenly reward is extrinsically and not instrinsically related to
moral rectitude (doing what God commands) in this life. It's
more like getting ice cream for cleaning your room. Cleaning
your room doesn't turn you into the sort of person who wants ice cream.
- Protagonists: William of Ockham,
Gabriel Biel, various
16th and 17th century theologians, mainly Protestant
- SIMPLE NATURALISM:
- (T1) is true and (T2)
is false
- The intrinsic standards of human flourishing
determine, by
themselves,
what human beings ought morally to and not to do. Natural 'law' is
merely descriptive and not prescriptive;
we need it for
epistemic reasons alone.
- Comments:
- Answer to the above question: YES!!
- Problem cases: murder, theft, adultery (see Scripture references below)
- Obligation and the lawgiver (See Miss Anscombe's "Modern
Moral
Philosophy")
- Protagonists: Gregory of Rimini
- NATURALISTIC DIVINE COMMAND THEORY:
- (T1) and (T2)
are both true.
- The dictates of right reason reveal
what we
ought to do and not to
do in order to attain human happiness, and so they reveal what is good
and bad in itself for us to do. Natural and divine law impose
a
further obligation
on us
to act in accord with right reason, since if God creates us, He necessarily
promulgates a law that, if obeyed, leads us to happiness. So natural
law is prescriptive and not merely descriptive.
- Comments:
- Answer to the above question: We
wouldn't have
any obligations imposed upon us by God through law, but .... God
couldn't create us
without issuing the relevant prohibition and, further, there would
still be an intrinsic badness in the act of torturing you for fun.
- This position may still allow for rather
striking
differences in moral
epistemology, depending on whether one is relatively optimistic
(Thomists)
or pessimistic (Scotists) about the ability of natural reason to see
moral
truth.
- Moral rectitude is necessary because it
transforms you intrinsically into the sort of person who wants the
beatific vision.
- Protagonists: St. Thomas and
virtually all the
Scholastics (including Suarez)
IIIC. Three Test Cases
- The cases: Each involves a divine
command that appears to
conflict with the dictates of
right reason as articulated by Aristotle (Ethics 2.6
(1107a10))
and Christ himself (Mark
7:21):
- Murder: Abraham and Isaac (Genesis
22)
- Adultery: Osee and a 'wife of
fornications' (Osee 1)
- Theft: The despoiling of the
Egyptians (Exodus 12)
- The replies:
- Strong Divine Command Theory: There
is no deep
difference between these cases
and normal cases.
- Simple Naturalism: Divine commands
do not have
prescriptive force.
- Naturalistic Divine Command Theory:
The divine command
constitutes a morally
relevant circumstance that renders virtuous an action that under normal
circumstances would be vicious. And God has the standing to issue such
commands
as the (i) author and Lord of human life and the dispenser of divine
justice, (ii) the author of the marriage contract, and (iii) the owner
of all property.
IIID. Intrinsic and
Extrinsic Teleology
- The Big Claim:
- Natural and divine law prescribe nothing that
conflicts
with genuine
human happiness--perfect or imperfect. That is, the extrinsic 'ought'
of
moral obligation is perfectly consonant with the intrinsic 'ought' of
the
dictates of right reason. Hence, obedience to natural and divine law
liberates us from slavery to sin and vice and hence from ultimate
despair of attaining happiness.
- The importance of models: The saints
FINIS