Natural Law - Ethics Flashcards

Question

Judgement critiquing Aquinas from Barth

Answer 1

Barth remains right that our corruption by OG sin makes our reasoning about God’s existence and morality corrupted too Even if there is a Natural Law, we are unable to discover it reliably with the bad in our nature meaning we cannot rely on the good - whatever a weak and misled conscience discovers is too unreliable Humanity’s belief it has the ability to know anything of God is the same arrogance that led Adam and Eve to disobey God - this belief in our power of figuring out right and wrong led to the arrogant certainty of Nazis in their superiority This arrogance of Natural Theology is evidence of a human inability to be humble enough to solely rely on faith

Answer 2

All humans are born with the ability to know and apply the Primary Precepts Even those who do not follow Christianity can: ‘*Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature what the law requires… God’s law is written in their hearts, for their own conscience and thoughts either accuse them or tell them they are doing right*’ - Romans 2:14-15 So it is possible to follow NL, regardless of your faith and access to the Bible

Answer 3

Secularists argue Biblical morality is primitive and barbarous, emerging from ancient human minds **J.S. Mill** calls the Old Testament ‘*Barbarous and intended only for a barbarous people*’ **Freud** similarly argued that religious morality reflected the ‘*Ignorant childhood days of the human race*’ Aquinas’ ethic is thus criticised for this reason as it was required to prevent societal collapse For example: - Once useful to restrict sexual behaviour to marriage because of how economically fatal single motherhood used to be - Useful to have more children because most died Clearly these socio-economic conditions have changed so primary precepts are no longer useful and society can afford to relax the rules without social order being threatened

Answer 4

Catholics argue it’s not outdated because it allows our society to flourish and counteracts the retrograde in Western ethics For example: - Marriages are fewer and less successful - Higher rate of mental illness People are no longer united by ethics but by consumerism and materialism So, religious and natural law ethics aren’t outdated by are a vital societal anchor for morality, meaning and purpose ‘*Excluding God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus to a reductive vision of the person and his destiny*’ - **Pope Benedict XIV**

Answer 5

NL is outdated because Aquinas’ theory was a reaction to his socio-economic context, which has changed drastically He thought he discovered the primary precepts through reason, but a simpler explanation is that Aquinas intuited what was good for people in his socio-economic condition The great strength of religion as a form of societal organisation is also its greatest weakness: By telling people that its ethical precepts come from God creates a strong motivation to follow them. Yet, because those precepts come from an eternal being, they become inflexible and painstakingly difficult to progress - this makes them increasingly outdated

Answer 6

Permits actions which contradict one primary precept if the action is in an effort to primarily preserve another E.g allowing condoms to prevent the spread of HIV Permitting condoms under ‘preserve and protect life’ Contradicting ‘nurture and foster the young’

Answer 7

The intentionality condition - Good effect must be intended and the bad ‘besides the intention’ e.g killing another in self defence is okay so long as you’re objective was to save your own life The proportionality condition - Good effect must be at least equivalent to the bad effect The means-end condition - good and bad effect must both be brought about simultaneously and immediately, otherwise the bad is being used to bring about the good - not permissible The nature of the act condition - the action must be either morally good, indifferent or neutral e.g killing an innocent can never be justified

Answer 8

It helps to resolve seemingly disparate Biblical themes - Jesus’ commands weren’t merely about following certain rules, but also about having the right moral intention and virtue, e.g Sermon on the Mount The DoDE provides important clarity to Christian ethics by showing the relation between the important moral elements of intention and following the moral law Good intention is important and, when involved in an action that has a good effect, can justify permitting a bad side effect

Answer 9

God’s commandments are presented as absolute and not dependent on someone’s intention The distinction between intended effects of action and merely foreseen effects ‘beside’ the intention has no morally relevant significance Intention isn’t irrelevant, e.g accidentally running over someone in the street who stepped out, **however**, if you can foresee a bad consequence, the fact it was a secondary effect doesn’t justify it

Answer 10

It’s an unsuccessful criticism because NL is different to the Bible - the Bible is inflexible, but that is the Divine Law The Natural Law is more flexible because it is in the form of very general precepts which require application and the telos of the Natural Law is glorifying God, which requires that it be our intention to glorify God - thus showing how intentions are relevant

Answer 11

This weakness is successful because it shows that NL is trying to add flexibility to inflexible Biblical Law The Natural and Divine Law don’t cover separate areas but cross over and so conflict on this point of inflexibility Christians must choose the Bible over Natural Law