in an absolute sense, but natural in a relative sense, as compared with grace. Wherefore, since the natural law even in its purely natural form is divine, its source being God, far more truly is the natural law of the divine order, a divine law. For the former [phase of natural law] is from God through the medium of nature, whence it flows as a property of nature; whereas the latter phase is [directly] from God, Who by His own action infuses grace and actual supernatural enlightenment, and Himself guides men to fulfil the commands of that law through aid supplied by a stimulating and assisting grace.
12. Finally, both phases of this law may be termed connatural to humanity, in so far as that which is concreate with nature and has always persisted in nature may in a certain sense be called natural. For in this sense, the law of connatural grace, also, has always existed among men; since the light of faith has never been lacking in mankind as a whole, nor in the whole Church, nor have men ever been without a supernatural divine law, in the absence of which they could not have striven toward eternal beatitude. Wherefore, when the conditions of men are, as is customary, distinguished through laws—that is to say, distinguished as being [respectively] the conditions under natural law, under written law, and under grace—then, in the case of the first state, one should understand by natural law, both the law of nature alone, and that which is connatural to grace, or the law of faith. For the world could never have been entirely without this law, in accordance with the ordinary course of providence, since it has always been possible for the doers of the law to be justified by divine aid; as may be inferred from the Epistle of Paul to the Romans (Chaps. ii and iii). So,
[print edition page 47]
also, the necessity and the utility of natural law, as explained in this latter sense, become evident; that is to say, it is necessary and useful because grace and faith have always been necessary, and the law in question is con-natural to them. [Natural law served] this purpose, too, namely: that man might have a law through the observance of which he could, by divine aid, obtain remission of sins and eternal life.
13. What is positive law? With respect to the third division of law, the positive, it should be noted that the term ‘positive’ is applied to that law which is not inherent in nature nor in grace, but has been laid down in addition to them by an extrinsic principle endowed with power, wherefore it is called ‘positive’, having been added, as it were, to the natural law, not flowing therefrom of necessity. Thus, by some persons, it has been called ‘the posited law’ (ius positum), a point that is brought out in Connan’s Commentary on the Civil Law (Bk. I, chap. viii). Again, a remark made by Aristotle (Ethics, Bk. I, chap. ix [Bk. X, chap. ix, §12]) is suitable to the positive law thus interpreted. He says: ‘law […] is a rule, emanating from a certain wisdom and intelligence, that has compulsory force.’ For though Aristotle was referring only to human law, nevertheless, his words are in themselves comparatively general; and so also the term ‘positive law’ has a wider application than has ‘human law’.
14. A division of positive law into divine and human. Thus the theologians deduce a third division, that of positive law into divine and human. That positive law is called divine which has been established directly by God Himself, and added to the whole body of natural law. Of human positive law, we shall speak presently. Apart from these two phases, however, there can be no other positive law relating to mankind, since there are no other legislators. For the angels have not such power over men, since it is not a part of their nature, nor has it been granted by God to them, inasmuch as11 their possession of that power has not, to our knowledge, been revealed to anyone, so that, consequently, we cannot divine [its existence].12 Accordingly, the term ‘divine law’ is here used to refer, not to
[print edition page 48]
the law which exists within God, but to that which emanates in a special manner from Him; for it denotes, not law that has been conceived, but law that has been made known, and in this among other respects it differs from the divine law as the latter was described by Plato.
Again, this [positive] law differs from the natural, interpreted in all its perfection as above set forth, in the fact that the natural law is not specifically added by God to nature itself, or to grace; whereas this [positive] law is specifically established and added thereto. Thus the natural law is not conferred, in itself and primarily, as a specific gift of law; rather it is conceived of as being that gift attached either to nature itself, or to faith and grace. For he who gives the form, gives also those things that are consequent upon the form. This [positive] law, on the other hand, is essentially and primarily bestowed, as a gift added to nature and to grace. Whence there has followed the custom of calling this branch simply ‘the law’ (lex), as is evident from the entire Epistle to the Romans, and from other passages of Scripture of which we shall speak presently. And therefore, the expression ‘divine law’, as such, is usually understood as referring to this [part of positive law]; and we, too, shall use the term in that sense, for the most part.
15. From the foregoing, it is also easy to discern the necessity of that divine law.
With respect to this point, it should be noted (lest one chance to be deceived by a verbal ambiguity) that St. Thomas (qu. 1, art. 4 [I.–II, qu. 91, art. 4]) adduces four reasons on account of which the divine law is necessary; reasons which, when attentively considered, will be found to contain proof only with respect to the divine law—whether natural or supernatural—in so far as it is connatural with grace, but not with respect to the positive supernatural law [i.e. positive divine law],13 according to the sense in which we are now speaking.
The first of the four reasons is this: that such divine law may direct man to a supernatural end. The second, that it may aid man in natural matters
[print edition page 49]
also, lest he err therein. The third, that it may furthermore be able to govern and order his interior acts. The fourth, that it may forbid all evil; for it is impossible that human law should do so. There is a passage in Psalms, xviii [, v. 8], too, which St. Thomas applies to these four properties: ‘The law of the Lord is unspotted, converting souls: the testimony of the Lord is faithful, giving wisdom to little ones.’ For this last phrase contains the first reason, since it is through wisdom that man is ordered to his supernatural end. The last reason, indeed, is comprehended in the third or penultimate property; for the law in question depends upon God’s truth; it cannot be subject to error; more than that, it is able to correct and repress the errors of nature. Again, the third reason enters into the second property; for the divine law is justly said to convert the soul, in that it directs interior acts.14 Lastly, this law is called unspotted, because it permits no evil.
All of these reasons furnish proof chiefly with respect to the divine law as it is connatural to grace. This is especially true of the first and second reasons, a point which I have also touched upon above. For the third and the fourth have application even to the purely natural law, since that law also prescribes internal acts that are good, and forbids those which are evil, while it does not actually permit of any act that is wrong. The divine positive law, as we are now speaking of it, is on the contrary concerned ordinarily with external acts.15 This fact is evident in the case of the Old Law, and also in that of the New, in so far as the latter deals with the Sacraments and the Ecclesiastical hierarchy. Furthermore, God does not forbid all evils through positive law; rather does this prohibition pertain to the divine natural law of both orders, as has been explained above.16
16. The divine [positive] law is necessary not in an absolute sense but on the basis of a presupposition. From the foregoing, we conclude that the divine positive law was necessary, not in an absolute sense, relatively to
[print edition page 50]
[man’s] supernatural end but on the presupposition of the institution of the Synagogue or of the Church. Relatively to such institution, the said law may be considered as an absolute necessity; although, with respect to the end itself, it serves rather for the better state and the greater instruction of mankind, either that men may be restrained in their excessive blindness and depraved morals, or for the sake of [their] greater perfection and enlightenment, that perfect virtue and holiness may be attained [by them]. The rational basis of the foregoing statements is as follows: even though some supernatural law, as well as some supernatural knowledge, may have been necessary, that law which was connatural to grace