Ancient and Modern: Natural Law and Universal Moral Principles

Abstract

The topic of this symposium pertains to how a Catholic should approach the purported distinction between ancient and modern political thought. What is implicit in this distinction is a concern with the modern (or postmodern) world in which we live—somewhere along the line, we have strayed from the better political thought and practice of an earlier age. A foundational premise for my paper is an observation that moral relativism, rooted in a rejection of immutable universal moral principles, is what is most problematic in our modern times. Whether or not a rejection of the immutability of universal moral principles is advocated by the modern thinkers, our contemporary politics, law, and morality (and much of contemporary political thought) reject some of these principles. Thus, any discussion regarding ancient and modern political thought should include a sound understanding of the natural moral law. The most notable advocate of a divide between the ancient and modern political thinkers is Leo Strauss, who, in Natural Right and History,1 proposes a return to the natural right/law of the ancients to counter both the natural rights of the moderns and historical relativism.2 Accompanying this advocacy for a return is Strauss’s critique of Thomistic natural law as it pertains to universal moral principles.3 From a traditional natural law perspective there are universal moral principles which suffer no exception—that is, applicable to all, at all times, and in all circumstances. These principles primarily (but not exclusively) concern specific actions which are known as intrinsically evil actions— actions which are always evil regardless of the intention of the one choosing or the circumstances surrounding the choice (VS, #52, 80-82). For Catholics, the foundations of any political community must (at least) rest upon the universal moral truths of the natural law (Evangelium Vitae, #70-71, VS, #95-96, 112-113).4 Without them, society descends into tyranny and/or totalitarianism (EV, #70; VS, #101). It is worthwhile to explore Strauss’s understanding of natural right to see whether or not his treatment of natural right/law in relation to the ancient/modern distinction is of help to Catholics. I will argue that Strauss’s desire to combat historical relativism by returning to ancient natural right includes a rejection of universal moral principles, and therefore the Catholic, who must assent to the natural moral law teaching, can not fully embrace this particular return.