<<
>>

Ius Naturale Secundarium

One wonders, did this natural law �by extension’ constitute a ius per se, as natural law strictly speaking, or rather ex alio, as volitional law? Throughout his works Grotius is very explicit regarding the special character of natural law.

All law might be the product of an act of will, the law of nature had a status very much of its own. It had taken its origin from the will of God, but was no longer affected by an external agent, man or God.u6 It was absolute and a necessity; eternal, auton­omous, and unchangeable; and it was the perfect expression of right reason. As we have seen, in ibp it is presented as commanding the moral status of an act with an appeal to its concordance with right reason and, as a consequence, with the will of the creator of nature. In 1627 reason is held to guide man to follow God’s demands in moral issues.u7 Man and animal shared the aspiration for self­preservation and self-procreation. Precisely the moral rod of his conscience set man apart from the instinct that guided the animal world.u8

Then, what about this second type of natural law?n9 In as much as its con­tent was in principle changeable, even though not without problems (if of a pragmatic nature), it would rather seem to qualify as volitional law. Still, in ibp the ambiguity from 1605 is conspicuously upheld. Whereas lacking the moral cogency of natural law, volitional law in Grotius’s perception around 1625 par­ticipated in natural law �by reduction’ (Grotius here refers to the scholastic term) in the sense of not conflicting with the latter?20 Grotius’s proposition is the more interesting in that he, very intentionally, reduces the traditional province of natural law stricto sensu by transferring from this domain to the �improper' category precepts such as on concubinage, divorce, and polygamy that traditionally had been reserved for natural law, indeed on the authority of Scripture.[586] [587] [588] [589] [590] [591]

The issue is a pertinent one as, much to, for example, Haggenmacher's concern, precisely this category of �improper' natural law formed the piece de resistance of Grotius's treatise of 1625. The move must therefore have been very intentional and the reason may be close at hand.

Natural law is by definition square, categorical and put in absolute terms of prescription and proscription. It makes no allowances for shades of grey and excludes �permissibilities'. Yet this is exactly the kind of category Grotius seems to have been keen to intro­duce in the equation. From the outset he is careful to point out that the second category does not run counter to natural law.122 It is my strong feeling that at the heart of it all is Grotius's ambition to find an answer to the complexity of the human condition that forever confronted man with moral dilemmas that eluded categorical answering.

9

<< | >>
Source: Blom Hans W. (ed.). Sacred Polities, Natural Law and the Law of Nations in the 16th-17th Centuries. Brill,2022. — 361 p.. 2022

More on the topic Ius Naturale Secundarium: