NATURAL MORAL LAW AND THE

FATHERS: A SYNOPSIS
FOR DR. ROMAN YERENIUK

Bryan Mykolai Garagan

OCTOBER 31, 2016
 Garagan 1

In the paper that follows we will summarize the principle features of the sub-section,

“Natural Moral Law and the Fathers”, as delineated in Fr. Stanley Harakas’ book Toward

Transfigured Life.

Fr. Harakas commences this section, observing that it is generally recognized that

contained in the teachings of the Fathers of the West, and the Eastern Fathers from the fourth and

fifth centuries, is an affirmation of the natural moral law. However, we cannot assert the same

concerning the Ante-Nicene Fathers. This is in part, Harakas explains, due to the legal

proclivities in the tradition of the West, vis-à-vis, the speculative development of the natural law

as facilitated by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, as well as the canonists of the West, which in

his view, “elicited a development never realized in the East.” Harakas theorizes, that the chief

reason for this is that while natural law is part of the Eastern theological framework, and thus

reserves, for it as such, a place therein, the Orthodox doctrines “of creation, anthropology, grace,

and soteriology” rejects any comprehension of the natural law as distinct or separate from the

overall understanding of revelation. Conversely the West, Fr. Stanley contends, has “tended to

sharply distinguish between nature and grace, natural knowledge and revelation, natural law and

evangelical ethics.” It would abound to our success, if our sagacious professor would elucidate,

the specifics of these distinctions. As stated above, the high esteem to which the East affords the

created cosmos, the potential of fallen humanity, and the deification of the soul and body,

mediates an inclination in the East which intricately ties the natural law view to “the full

Christian experience.” Moreover, of what the natural law consists, is somewhat restricted and

therefore its application in Eastern Christian ethics, while significant is also limited. (127)

Having introduced the topic, Harakas proceeds to examine several of the early Patristic

fathers and some of the later fathers to demonstrate that they emphatically acknowledged the
 Garagan 2

natural law, and included it in their teachings. From the apologists, Harkas cites Athengoras who

writes “God made man of an immortal soul and body, and furnished him with an understanding

and an innate law for the preservation and safeguard of the things giving by Him as suitable to an

intelligent existence and a rational life.” In the author’s estimation, though, Justin Martyr is

singled out as the preeminent father of natural law . He endeavored to reconcile the apparent

inconsistency, wherein both Christian and pagans alike, were endued with the potential to

perceive and teach truths. This phenomenal coincidence as explained by Justin Martyr is a

consequence of the “spermatic logos” or “word”. The first aspect of this doctrine lies in the

assurance that man is a rational being. Justin argues that humanity from the beginning was

created with the ability “to choose the truth and able to do the good” and thus “all men are

“without excuse””, before God.i (127-128)

Having stressed the universal endowment of rationality upon all humanity, he then posits

that there exists “seeds” of truth intrinsic to all persons. That these “seeds” exist is predicated on

the Christological doctrine of “the pre-existent logos (word, reason, rationality.)” Since the logos

signifies reason and “Christ is the logos”, Man’s ability to reason is “Christ in man.” Martyr then

deduces, a prioriii, that we may ascribe the wisdom of the pagan world in the pre-Christian aeon

to the logos, given that He is the reason in all men. He does caution, however that intimate

knowledge of the Word (logos), or rather the lack thereof, led to incongruities. They may he

declares, find and contemplate “some part of the Word…but since they did not know the whole

of the Word, which is Christ, they often contradicted each other.” (128)

i
As quoted by Harakas.
ii
Knowledge acquired by deduction rather than observation or experience
 Garagan 3

This viewpoint, Harakas suggests, logically engenders a “natural law position”. It is in

the approximation of this patristic father that intrinsic to man’s nature is the knowledge of good

and evil. Only those who act contrary to this law of nature and refuse to acknowledge their

unrighteousness, Justin Martyr insists, are the exception. These he states, “are possessed with an

unclean spirit” and have attenuated their natural reason by persistent wickedness. But even in

their sinfulness they witness to the authenticity of the natural law, for we may observe Justin

Martyr explicates: “that such persons are unwilling to submit to the same things they inflict upon

others, and reproach each other with hostile consciences for the acts which they perpetrate.”

(128).

Ireaneus also an early father, offers his contribution to the natural law position by means

of a refutation. The Gnostics influenced by platonic or neo-platonic reasoning, postulated that all

created beings were in essence divine emanations, hence clouding the distinction between the

Creator and creation. Irenaeos, on the other hand clearly “distinguished between…the

Creator…and creation”, stressing the doctrine “of creation ex nihilo.” In agreement with Justin

Martyr, he affirms that God endowed man with the capacity for moral discernment. Concurring

with the anthropology of the East, Iraneos teaches that obedience to God is “the life of man” and

disobedience is “death.”iii (128-129)

Clement of Alexandria, Harakas relates, purposed to promote a Christian philosophy that

incorporated the positive influences of Greek philosophy but also intended to demonstrate its

inadequacy. He uses Justin Martyr’s Logos doctrine but elaborates that the logos “has a three-

fold meaning: a) the Incarnate Word of God, b) the mind which guides the world, and c) reason,

iii
The quotations of Irenaeos in the preceding paragraph are as quoted by Harakas
 Garagan 4

found in all rational beings, which is the natural moral law.” Therefore, man was created in the

image of the Logos, and thus has the innate potential to distinguish right from wrong. Clement in

furtherance to Justin, asserts that man is born with an inherent ability through natural law to

observe right from wrong, but still must acquire virtue. Even though they are both from God, one

is given at birth (the law of nature) and the other (virtue) is learned. (129)

Origen, also argues that the natural law is a gift from God. However, in his view the law

is contingent upon the maturation of each individual. Perhaps, the most significant contribution

of Origen, in the view of Harakas, is his distinction between the natural law and conscience. The

first, he suggests, is “a rational power of the soul” in which we recognize the “content of the

law” and the second “is a spiritual power” which acts as a “guide to the moral life.” In the

thinking of Origen man made in the image of God constitutes the capacity for right action and

when categorically animated it is capable of achieving every good thing. (130)

Tertullian, who Fr. Stanley surveys next, teaches concurrently concerning the Mosaic and

natural law. He conveys that the natural law predated the Mosaic Law, thus it was generally

acknowledged among the unbelievers, and “habitually kept” by the Hebraic fathers. He also

writes of a “rule of nature” that is common to all mankind. He answers the pagan objection,

demanding for a law of God by appealing to the Romans text alluded to in the previous section

covered by our brother Max. To there hubris he retorts: “…you have that common one (law of

God) prevailing over all the world engraven on the natural tables to which the Apostle is wont to

appeal.” Tertullian affirms both that there is a natural law and that nature, itself reveals the law.

(Ibid).
 Garagan 5

St. Methodius in the fourth century connects natural law to man’s sinful state and

references this teaching to his theodicy.iv With regards to the natural law he posits there are two

thought processes. One, is that which emanates from the flesh, born of the “Evil Spirit”, and the

other has its basis in the law. The latter he avows: “was implanted in us as a natural law stirring

up our thoughts to good.”

Having covered the Ante-Nicene period Harakas briefly presents some of the later

fathers, two of which are presented here. St. Basil the Great reasons in his Hexameron that

creation’s general order and harmony serve as an archetype “for the ordering of human life.” He

points to social order as indicative of the natural law.

It was St. John Chrysostom, Harakas opines, whom expounded most regarding the

natural law. It is with the following citation that we will conclude our synopsis since we consider

it a precis of the section, and believe that it adequately captures what we and the author have

tried to convey: “The law of nature is general, eternal, and immortal. Special revelation is not

needed to understand its precepts; it is known naturally. The law of nature is identified with the

natural logos or reason. It is the moral teacher of mankind.” And as the golden-tongued father

asserts: “God placed in man the inborn law (emphyton nomon), to serve as does the captain over

a ship, or the charioteer over the horse.”

iv
Theodicy could be described as grappling with the justification of a good God in light of the existence of evil
Garagan 6