Natural Law and a National Consensus:

...and what is dead or outdated is the pseudophilosophic ideas of the superficial Enlightenment of the 18th century, the newer secular evolutionary humanism which still pervades our universities and the fuzzy categories of Protestant moral thought...

...But the more interesting question is a philosophic one: Has natural law been demonstrated...

...Father Murray's essays are not so tightly knit that if we deny his claims concerning the Catholic interpretation of natural law we must reject his many valuable insights and analyses...

...The Enlightenment, the Reformation, the rise of secular humanism may all be viewed as serious attempts to grapple with the complex issues of reason, its scope and limits...

...All these virtues are exhibited in John Courtney Murray's provocative collection of essays, We Hold These Truths...

...Logically, the issue of the reality of natural law and the acceptance of Catholic dogma are distinct...

...Either of these positions (as Father Murray indicates at other places in his essays) results in a serious misreading of American history...

...Father Murray's return to natural law is not merely sentimental nostalgia for days of medieval order...

...One may push the argument one step further: The basic issue is really the nature of reason...

...Though sharply critical and vigorous in its condemnations, the book is not primarily negative in tone...

...The fundamentalist morality of the 19th century is taken to test for its "simplism...

...In fact, the predominant theme running through all these essays is natural law: its "true" meaning, its vigorousness and its immediate relevance to the current American situation...

...But his description of the alternatives—"sentimental subjectivist scriptural fundamentalism," "ambiguism," "the pseudo-morality of secular liberalism" and "ubiquitous" pragmatism— borders on caricature...

...There is no contradiction in accepting the doctrine of natural law as put forth by Aristotle and rejecting the Catholic interpretation of it...

...The question is invalid as well as impertinent...

...If a proposition claimed in the name of reason cannot withstand unbiased public confirmation then something fundamental is out of joint...

...There is even a touch of barbarism here, dismissal more by name calling than by forceful argument...

...Father Murray's answer is affirmative, but in the course of giving his answer he severely criticizes several traditional figures and ideas...

...Their position, dubbed "ambiguism," is reduced to an "illusion that is marshy and murky...

...There can be little doubt that the talk about natural rights and natural law which played such a large part in the founding of this country was highly influenced by Locke, or more accurately, by the climate of opinion that influenced Locke...

...for the manner of its position inverts the order of values...

...Thomas Aquinas...

...We Hold These Truths is certainly not an apology, in the conventional sense of the term, for the American Catholic community, though it is an apology—a rational defense—in its classic meaning...

...First, it is important to make two historical points...

...But the reasoning is not given here and I am skeptical about the possibility of providing an argument which would be fundamentally sound...

...Fortunately...

...No religious or secular group has a unique claim to the "tradition of reason...

...John Locke, who is usually thought of as providing the theoretical framework for the justification of the American Revolution and the doctrine of inalienable rights, is criticized for his "rationalism, individualism and nominalism...

...Reviewed by Richard J. Bernstein Assistant professor of philosophy, Yale University There ARE few things as impressive as a first-rate Catholic intellectual who has rigor, clarity, a thorough command of his material and tough-mindedness...

...The "secular humanism" of the liberal tradition of the 20th century, perhaps best typified by John Dewey (though Dewey is not referred to by name), is at bottom "an ethical relativism pure and simple...

...After sketching the possibility of applying natural law morality to public policy, he makes the claim that "the Protestant moralist, whatever his school, cannot possibly argue questions of policy in the moral terms of the tradition of reason...

...One may, and presumably Father Murray would, argue that only Thomistic metaphysics and epistemology can adequately interpret natural law...

...The answer we are given is that the "tradition is alien to him at every point...

...One may even accept the theory of natural law and the Catholic interpretation of it and still disagree with Father Murray's specific points—as many Catholics have...

...His last chapter, "The Doctrine Lives: The Eternal Return of Natural Law," contains a vicious and unfair attack on the philosophy of John Locke...

...To make such a claim is presumptuous and pernicious—pernicious because it tends to undermine the very objective norms of rational inquiry...

...While such a consensus does not exist in fact, there is a pressing need for it...

...When speaking of the American consensus—the American public philosophy—Father Murray concedes that the "Noes have it," that there is at present no public philosophy with affirmative tenets that determine positive goals...

...Second, Father Murray's position appears to entail a rather distorted picture of the Founding Fathers...

...And even the Catholic community is chided, for Father Murray believes that it hasn't been much interested in foreign affairs "beyond its contribution in sustaining the domestic mood of anti-Communism...

...Though at times Father Murray acknowledges that the theory of natural law has deeper roots than that of Christianity, he creates the impression that the Catholic Church alone has been its noblest protector and interpreter...

...The Government fat least the pre-Kennedy Administration) is also the butt of his caustic criticism: He speaks of "emanations of cryto-pacifism from the White House, which seems to hold that we shall never shoot at all...

...Father Murray eloquently pleads for civilized public argument: "Civilization is formed by men locked in argument," he writes, and barbarism...

...which is the real threat to the American community, is defined as a state of affairs where men fail to engage in reasonable conversation...

...Though Father Murray spends a good deal of time telling us how natural law has been misinterpreted and what it is not, when it comes to proving it he reverts more to dogmatic assertion than to rational argument...

...Why can't the Protestant moralist, or anyone else, argue in these terms...

...He tries to win the day by enumerating alternative positions and showing their weaknesses and speciousness...

...They were all reactions to many doctrines claimed in the name of reason which turned out not to be rational...

...Or one may agree with many of his points concerning the First Amendment, the analysis of foreign policy here and in Russia, etc., and reject the doctrine of natural law...

...I submit that Father Murray has not adequately established his proposition...

...The argument running through the essays then can be succinctly put as an attempt to establish the truth of this proposition— to show that natural law alone has the vital resources to serve as a "new" foundation of the American public philosophy...

...This is a shocking indictment...

...A proposition, we are told, is a statement of a truth to be demonstrated and a statement of an operation to be performed...

...Yet at times Father Murray seems to come close to saying that what is living is the set of truths and principles which have been gleaned from the medieval tradition of natural law, especially as it was put forth by St...

...But the lack of logical dependence may also suggest that it is not the Catholic interpretation of natural law that can or will serve as a foundation for a desperately needed American consensus in a new age...

...But if the tradition of reason which is identified with natural law is limited to a specific religious group, is it really rational...

...This too, many non-Catholics have done...

...At one point we are told that the basic issue is not simply the relation of morality to public policy, but the nature of morality...

...What is even more remarkable is that Father Murray has set his intelligence to work on some of the most complex problems confronting us all: the moral issues of limited war, the meaning of the First Amendment as related to the general problem of church and state and the specific issues of school aid and censorship, and the uses of doctrine and ideology in Soviet foreign policy...

...It must, of course, be turned round to read, whether American democracy is compatible with Catholicism...

...His book might have been sub-titled "What is Living and Dead in American Democracy...

...If we accept Father Murray's interpretation of the Lockean conception of natural law and natural rights as a conglomeration of superficial and confused ideas which implicitly contain pernicious consequences, then we are driven to the conclusion that the Founding Fathers who wrote and thought within a similar framework, and even used these ideas to justify a revolution, were either blatant hypocrites for using Locke as a political instrument but not taking him seriously, or blind for not seeing the perniciousness of Locke and failing to realize that they were really talking about the natural law and right of the central medieval tradition...

...Father Murray's failure to demonstrate the truth and relevance of natural law can be seen in another way...

...But the very distinction of natural and positive law as well as the justification of a higher law of reason is a heritage bequeathed by non-Christian Greek and Roman civilizations...

...Early in the book, Father Murray in his typically forthright manner declares: "The question is sometimes raised whether Catholicism is compatible with American democracy...

...Nor does Father Murray think that recent excursions by Protestant theologians into the fields of politics and morality are very illuminating...

...My proposition is that only the theory of natural law is able to give an account of the public moral experience that is the public consensus...