Introduction
St. Thomas Aquinas examines the idea of human law in the broader framework of divine law in Summa Theologiae. Specifically, the positive law, often known as the law of man, and the everlasting and unchanging divine law. This essay will examine Aquinas’ defense of human law, as well as its drawbacks, with a focus on the organization of the just political community. The presentation will also highlight similarities between Aristotle’s view of politics, as outlined in his work Politics, and Thomas Aquinas’ concept of a just political community, to support its points.
Aquinas’ Arguments on Human vs. Natural Law in Political Community
The first argument put forth by Aquinas concerns the necessity of human law. He contends that natural law, which is an expression of the eternal law, suffices for the regulation of all human matters and negates the necessity for human law (Cahn 2012, 306). The disparities between these various legal systems must first be understood to comprehend Aquinas’ defense of human law.
According to Aquinas, the divine intelligence is the source of the everlasting law, which provides the overall framework guiding the order and goal of the universe. The human perception of this timeless law, on the other hand, is known as natural law. It offers a logical foundation for determining what is ethically right or wrong.
Aquinas responds to the criticism by stating that while natural law provides a fundamental moral framework, its practical applicability to specific human concerns is limited. Natural law is more comprehensive and abstract, directing human reason toward overarching moral principles, such as the protection of life and the pursuit of truth and happiness. It does not, however, provide comprehensive guidelines that encompass every aspect of human civilization. Natural law cannot fully account for the practical complexities and contingencies of human life; hence, human law is required.
Aquinas emphasizes the importance of reason and wisdom in the creation of human law, defending its necessity. Since it addresses specific situations and thereby adapts to the variety of human circumstances, human law, as a product of human reason, is crucial (Cahn 2012, 312). It complements natural law by providing specific rules and standards that guide people’s behavior in daily life.
Furthermore, human law is adaptable and can be modified as society’s conditions change, unlike natural law, which remains rigid. According to Aquinas, “Human law is now designed for a variety of people, the majority of whom are not perfect in virtue. Therefore, human laws only prohibit the most severe vices, from which it is possible for the majority to abstain, rather than all vices that the virtuous refrain (Cahn 2012, 368).
According to Aquinas, human law plays a crucial role in creating a just political community. He envisions a community where human law is an essential component, working in harmony with natural law and divine law. This perspective aligns with Aristotle’s conception of politics in many ways.
Similarities with Aristotle’s Perspectives on Political Community
Both Aquinas and Aristotle emphasize the ideal of good and moral behavior within the political community. In Politics, Aristotle argues that the primary goal of the political community is to promote the ultimate good, which he identifies as living a moral life (Cahn 2012, 242). According to Aristotle, cultivating moral and intellectual virtues is essential for leading a moral life. Aquinas holds a similar viewpoint, emphasizing that human law should further the general good by encouraging moral behavior. He contends that human law should seek to maximize community happiness, which is attained through moral behavior.
Aristotle and Aquinas both emphasize the importance of the rule of law in maintaining justice and order within a political society. They believed that human law should be guided by the precepts of both natural and divine law and be just. This approach is consistent with Aristotle’s claim that excellent laws are those that support justice and the common good and are in keeping with the best constitution.
Aristotle and Aquinas both agree on the importance of the rule of law as a safeguard against tyranny. Human law serves as a protection against the abuse of power in a just political community. It offers transparent and equal norms that restrain the power of rulers and prevent the abuse of the rights and liberties of people. The proper and equitable distribution of power is guaranteed by human law, according to the political theories of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas.
Differences in Aristotle’s and Aquinas’ Views
Aristotle and Aquinas both held strong opinions about the just political community, yet there are also some significant discrepancies between them. As a theologian, Aquinas explores the concept of divine law and its relationship to human law. He contends that heavenly law, which includes church doctrines, should direct human law and serve as an additional source of moral instruction. Due to his entire emphasis on human reason and the common good, Aristotle’s political philosophy lacks this divine component.
Conclusion
In light of both natural and divine laws, St. Thomas Aquinas concludes by defending the necessity of human law. Human law is required to solve the practical difficulties of human affairs and adapt to changing conditions, whereas natural law offers a fundamental moral compass. Aquinas envisions a well-ordered political society in which human law, guided by reason and the common good, plays a crucial role in fostering virtue and preventing tyranny.
This viewpoint emphasizes the value of the common good, the rule of law, and the avoidance of tyranny, which is similar to Aristotle’s political philosophy. However, Aquinas adds a religious component to his political philosophy, distinguishing it from Aristotle’s secular outlook. A thorough knowledge of the moral and political facets of human society is made possible by Aquinas’ defense of human law.
Reference
Cahn, Stephen M. 2011. Classics of Political and Moral Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.