OF THE LAW OF NATURE.
In what the Law of Nature consists, and that there
is such a thing. First considerations, drawn from the existence of God
and his authority over us.
I. AFTER having settled the general principles of law,
our business is now to apply them to natural law in particular. The questions,
we have to examine in this second part, are of no less importance, than
to know whether man, by his nature and constitution, is really subject
to law properly so called. What are these laws? Who is the superior, that
imposes them? By what method or means is it possible to know them? Whence
results the obligation of observing them? What consequence may follow from
our negligence in this respect? And in fine, what advantage on the contrary
may arise from the observance of these laws ?
II. Let us begin with a proper definition of the terms.
By natural law we understand a law, that God imposes on all men, and which
they are able to discover and know by the sole light of reason, and by
attentively considering their state and nature.
Natural law is likewise taken for the system, assemblage,
or body of, the laws of nature.
Natural jurisprudence is the art of attaining to the knowledge
of the laws of nature, of explaining and applying them to human actions.
III. But whether there be really any natural laws is the
first question that presents itself here to our inquiry. In order to make
a proper answer we must ascend to the principles of natural theology, as
being the first an true foundation of the law of nature. For, when we are
asked whether there are any natural laws, this question cannot be resolved,
but by examining the three following articles. 1. Whether there is a God?
2. If there is a God, whether he has a right to impose laws on man? 3.
Whether God actually exercises his right in this respect, by really giving
us laws, and requiring we should square thereby our actions? These three
points will furnish the subject of this and the following chapters.
IV. The existence of God, that is of a first, intelligent,
and selfexistent being, on whom all things depend, as on their first cause,
and who depends himself on no one; the existence, I say, of such a being
is one of those truths, that show themselves to us at the first glance.
We have only to attend to the evident and sensible proofs, that present
themselves to us, as it were, from all parts.
The chain and subordination of cause among themselves
which necessarily requires we should fix on a first cause, the necessity
of acknowledging a first mover, the admirable structure and order of the
universe, are all so many demonstrations of the existence of God, within
the reach of every capacity. Let us unfold them in a few words.
V. We behold an infinite number of objects, which, being
united, form the assemblage, we call the universe. Something therefore
must have always existed. For, were we to suppose a time in which
there was absolutely nothing, it is evident that nothing could have ever
existed because, whatsoever has a beginning must have a cause of its existence
since nothing can produce nothing. It must be therefore acknowledged, that
there is some eternal being, who exists necessarily and of himself for
he can be indebted to no one else for his origin; and it implies a contradiction,
that such a being does not exist.
Moreover this eternal being, who necessarily and of himself
subsists, is endued with reason and understanding. For, to pursue
the same manner of arguing, were we to suppose a time, in which there was
nothing but inanimate beings, it would have been impossible for intelligent
beings, such as we now behold, ever to exist. Intellection can no more
proceed from a blind and unintelligent cause, than a being, of any kind
whatsoever, can come from nothing. There must therefore have alwavs
existed a father of spiritual beings, an eternal mind, the source, whence
all others derive their existence. Let what system soever be adopted concerning
the nature and origin of the soul, our proof subsists still in its full
force. Were it even to be Supposed, that the cogitative part of man is
no more than the effect of a certain motion or modification of matter,
yet we should still want to know how matter acquired this activity, which
is not essential to it, and this particular and so much admired organization,
which it cannot impart to itself. We should inquire, who is it, that has
modified the body in such a manner proper to produce such wonderful operations,
as those of intellection, which reflects, which acts on the very body itself
with commands, which surveys the earth, and measures the heavens, recollects
past transactions, and extends its views to futurity. Such a masterpeice
must come from the hands of an intelligent cause; wherefore it is absolutely
necessary to acknowledge a first, eternal, and intelligent Being
VI. An eternal Spirit, who has within himself the principle
of his own existence, and of all his faculties, can be neither changed
nor destroyed; neither dependent nor limited; he should even be invested
with infinite perfection, sufficient to render him the sole and first cause
of all, so that we may have no occasion to seek for any other.
But does not (some will ask) this quality of an eternal
and intelligent being belong to matter itself, to the visible world, or
to some of the parts thereof?
I answer that this supposition is absolutely contrary
to all our ideas. Matter is not essentially and of itself intelligent;
nor can it be supposed to acquire intellection but by a particular modification,
received from a cause supremely intelligent. Now this first cause cannot
have such a modification from any other being for he thinks essentially
and of himself wherefore he cannot be a material being. Besides, as all
the parts of the universe are variable and dependent, how is it possible
to reconcile this with the idea of an infinite and all perfect being?
As for what relates to man, his dependence and weakness
are much more sensible, than those of other creatures. Since he has no
life of himself, he cannot be the efficient cause of the existence of others.
He is unacquainted with the structure of his own body, and with the principle
of life; incapable of discovering in what manner motions are connected
with Ideas, and which is the proper Spring of the empire of the will. We
must therefore look out for an efficient, primitive, and original cause
of mankind, beyond the human chain, be it supposed ever so long; we must
trace the cause of each part of the world beyond this material and visible
VII. 2. After this first proof, drawn from the necessity
of a first, eternal, and intelligent being, distinct from matter; we proceed
to a second, which shows us the Deity in a more sensible manner and more
within the reach of common capacities. The proof I mean is the contemplation
of this visible world wherein we perceive a motion and order which matter
has not of itself, and must therefore receive from some other being.
Motion or active force is not an essential quality of
body. Extension is of itself rather a passive being. It is easily conceived
at rest and, if it has any motion we may well conceive it may loose it
without being stript of its existence; it is a quality or state, that passes
and is accidentally communicated from one body to another. The first impression
must therefore proceed from an intrinsic cause and, as Aristotle has well
expressed it, The first mover of bodies must not be moveable himself, must
not be a body. This has also been agreed to by Hobbes. But the acknowledging,
says he, of one God, eternal, infinite and omnipotent, may more easily
be derived from the desire men have to know the causes of natural bodies,
and their several virtues and operations, than from the fear of what was
to befal them in time to come. For he, who, from any effect he seeth come
to pass, should reason to the next and immediate cause thereof, and thence
to the cause of that cause, shall at last come to this, that there must
be (as even the heathen philosophers confessed) one first mover; that is,
a first and eternal cause of all things; which is that, which men mean
by the name of God.
VIII 3. But, if matter has not been able to move of itself,
much less was it able to move to the exact degree, and with all the determinations
necessary to form such a world, as we behold, rather than a confused chaos.
In fact, let us only cast our eyes on this universe, and
we shall every where discover, even at the first glance, an admirable beauty,
regularity, and order, and this admiration will increase in proportion
as, in searching more closely into nature, we enter into the particulars
of the structure, proportion, and use of each part. For then we shall clearly
see, that every thing is relative to a certain end, and that these particular
ends, though infinitely varied among themselves, are so dexterously managed
and combined as to conspire all to a general design. Notwithstanding this
amazing diversity of creatures, there is no confusion we behold several
thousand different species, which preserve their distinct form and qualities.
The parts of the universe are proportional and balanced, in order
to preserve a general harmony and each of those parts has exactly its proper
figure, proportions, situation, and motion, either to produce its particular
effect, or to form a beautiful wbole.
It is evident therefore, that there is a design, a choice,
a visible reason in all the works of nature, and consequently there are
marks of wisdom and understanding, obvious, as it were, even to our very
IX. Though there have been some philosophers, who have
attributed all these phenomena to chance, yet this so ridiculous a thought,
that I question whether a more extravagant chimera ever entered into the
mind of man. Is it possible for any one to persuade himself seriously,
that the different parts of matter, having been set in some unaccountable
manner in motion, produce of themselves the heavens, the stars, the earth,
the plants, and even animals and men, and whatever is most regular in the
organization? A man, that would pass the like judgment on the least edifice,
on a book or pictures would be looked upon, as a mad, extravagant person.
How much more shocking is it to common sense to attribute to chance so
vast a work, and so wonderful a composition, as this universe?
X. It would be equally frivolous to alledge the eternity
of the world, in order to exclude a first intelligent cause. For, besides
the marks of novelty, we meet with in the history of mankind, as the origin
of nations and empires, and the invention of arts and sciences, &c.
beside the assurance we have from the most general and most ancient tradition,
that the world has had a beginning (a tradition, which is of great weight
in regard to a matter of fact, like this,) besides I say all this, the
very nature of the thing does not allow us to admit of this hypothesis
any more than that of chance. For the question is still, whence comes this
beautiful order, this regular structure and design, in a word, whence proceed
those marks of reason and wisdom, that are so visibly displayed in all
parts of the universe? To say that it had been always so, without the intervention
of an intelligent cause, does not explain the thing, but leaves us in the
same embarrassment, and advances the same absurdity, as those, who awhile
ago were speaking to us of chance. For this is in reality telling us, that
whatever we behold throughout the universe is blindly arranged, without
design, choice, cause, reason, or understanding. Hence the principal absurdity
of the hypothesis of chance occurs likewise in this system; with this difference
only, that, by establishing the eternity of the world, they suppose a chance,
that from all eternity hit upon order; whereas those, who attribute the
formation of the world to the fortuitous junction of its parts, suppose
that chance did not succeed till a certain time, when it fell in at length
with order, after an infinite number of trials and fruitless combinations.
Both acknowledge therefore no other cause than chance, or properly speaking
they acknowledge none at all; for chance is no real cause it is a word,
that cannot account for a real effect, such as the arrangement of the universe.
It would not be a difficult matter to carry these proofs
to much greater length, and even to increase them with an additional number.
But this may suffice for a work of this kind and the little we have said
intitles us methinks to establish the existence of a First Cause or of
a Creator, as an incontestable truth, that may serve henceforward for the
basis of all our reasonings.
X . As soon as we have acknowledged a Creator, it is evident,
that he has a supreme right to lay his commands on man, to prescribe rules
of conduct to him, and to subject him to law and it is no less evident,
that man on his side finds himself, by his natural constitution, under
an obligation of subjecting his actions to the will of this supreme Being.
We have already shown, that the true foundation of soveignty,
in the person of the sovereign is power united with wisdom and goodnsss;
and that, on the other hand, weakness and wants in the subjects are the
natural cause of dependence. We have only therefore to see, whether all
these qualities of sovereign are to be found in God; and whether men on
their side, are in a state of infirmity and wants, so as to depend necessarily
on him for their happiness.
XII. It is beyond doubt, that he who exists
necessarily and on himself, and has created the universe, must be invested
with infinite power. As he has given existence to all things by his own
will, he may likewise preserve, annihilate, or change them, as he pleases.
But his wisdom is equal to his power. Having made every
thing, he must know every thing, a well the causes, as the effect thence
resulting. We see besides in all his work the most excellent ends, and
a choice of the most proper means to attain them; in short, they all bear,
as it were, the stamp of wisdom.
XIII. Reason informs us, that God is a being essentially
good; a perfection, which seems to flow naturally from his wisdom an power.
For how is it possible for a being, who of his nature is inifinitely wise
and powerful, to have any inclination to hurt? Surely no sort of reason
can ever determine him to it. Malice, cruelty, and injustice, are always
a consequence of ignorance or weakness. Let man therefore consider but
never so little the littleness, which surround him, and reflect on his
own constitution, he will discover, both within and without himself, the
benevolent hand of his Creator, who treats him like a father. It is from
God we hold our life and reason; it is he, that supplies most abundantly
our wants, adding the useful to the necessary, and the agreeable to the
useful. Philosophers observe, that whatever contributes to our preservation,
has been arrayed with some agreeable quality. Nourishment, repose, action,
heat, cold, in short whatever is useful to us, pleases us in its turn,
and so long as it is useful. Should it cease to be so, because things are
carried to a dangerous excess, we have notice therefore by an opposite
sensation. If, the allurement of pleasure invites us to use them, when
they are necessary for our wants; disrelish an lassitude induce us to abstain
from them, when they are likely to hurt us. Such is the happy and sweet
economy of nature, which annexes a pleasure to the moderate exercise of
our senses and faculties, insomuch that whatever surrounds us becomes a
source of satisfaction, when we know how to use it with discretion. What
can be more magnificent, for example, than this great theatre of the world,
in which we live and this glittering decoration of heaven an earth, exhibiting
a thousand agreeable objects to our view? What satisfaction does not the
mind receive from the sciences, by which it is exercised, enlarged, and
What conveniences do not we draw from human industry?
What advantage do not we derive from an intercourse with our equals; what
charms in their conversation! what sweetness in friendship, and the other
connexions of the heart! When we avoid the excess and abuse of things,
the greatest part of life abounds with agreeable sensations. And if to
this we add, that the laws, which God gives us, tend, as hereafter we shall
see, to perfect our nature, to prevent all kind of abuse, and to confine
us to a moderate use of the good things of life, on which the preservation,
excellence, and happpiness, as well public as private, of man depend, what
more is there wanting to convince us, that the goodness of God is not inferior
either to his wisdom or power? We have therefore a superior undoubtedly
invested with all the qualities necessary to find the most legitimate and
most extensive authority. And since on our side experience shows us, that
we are weak and subject to divers wants; and since every thing we have,
we have from him, and he is able either to augment or diminish our enjoyments;
it is evident, that nothing is wanting here to establish on the one side
the absolute sovereignty of God, and on the other hand our unlimited dependance.
That God, in consequence of bis authority over us,
has actually thougbt proper to prescribe to us laws or rules of conduct.
I. To prove the existence of God, and our dependence in
respect to him, is establishing the right he has of prescribing laws to
man. But this is not sufficient; the question is, whether he has actual
y thought proper to exercise this right? He can undoubtedly impose laws
on us; but has he really done it? And though we depend on him for our life,
and for our physical faculties, has he not left us in a state of independence
in respect to the moral use, to which we are to apply them? This is a third
and capital point, we have still left to examine.
II. 1. We have made some progress already in this research,
by discovering all the circumstances, necessary to establish an actual
legislature. On the one side we find a superior, who by his nature is possessed
in the very highest degree of all the conditions requisite to establish
a legitimate authority and on the other we behold man, who is God's creature,
endowed with understanding and liberty, capable of acting with knowledge
an choice, sensible of pleasure and pain, susceptible of good and evil,
of rewards an punishments. Such an aptitude of giving and receiving laws
cannot be useless. This concurrence of relations and circumstances undoubtedly
denotes an end, and must have some effect just as the particular organization
of the eye shows we are destined to see the light. Why shoudd God have
made us exactly fit to receive laws, if he intended none for us? This would
be creating so many idle and useless faculties. It is therefore not only
possible, but very probable, that our destination in general is such, unless
the contrary should appear from much stronger reasons. Now instead
of there being any reason to destroy this first presumption, we shall see,
that every thing tends to confirm it.
III. 2. When we consider the beautiful order, which the
supreme wisdom has established in the physical world, it is impossible
to persuade ourselves, that he has abandoned the spiritual or moral world
to chance and disorder. Reason, on the contrary, tells us, that a wise
being proposes to himself a reasonable end in every thing he does, and
that he uses all the necessary means to attain it. The end, which God had
in view with regard to his creatures, and particularly with respect to
man, cannot be any other, on the one side, than his glory; and on the other,
the perfection and happiness of his creatures, so far as their nature or
constitution will admit. These two views, so worthy of the Creator, are
perfectly combined. For the glory of God consists in manifesting
his perfections, his power, his goodness, wisdom, and justice ; and these
virtues are nothing else but the love of order and of the good of the whole.
Thus a being absolutely perfect and supremely happy, willing to conduct
man to that state of order and happiness, which suits his nature, cannot
but be willing at the same time to employ whatever is necessary for such
an end; and consequently he must approve of those means, that are proper,
and, disapprove of such, as are improper for attaining it. Had the constitution
of man been merely physical or mechanical, God himself would have done
whatever is expedient for his work; but man being a free and intelligent
creature, capable of discernment and choice, the means, which the Deity
uses to conduct him to his end, ought to be proportioned to his nature,
that is such as man may engage in, and concur with, by his own actions.
Now, as all means are not equally fit to conduct us to
a certain end, all human actions cannot therefore be indifferent. Plain
it is, that every actions contrary to the ends, which God has proposed,
is not agreeable to the divine Majesty and that he approves, on the contrary,
those, which of themselves are proper to promote his ends. Since there
is a choice to be made, who can question but our Creator is willing we
should take the right road and that, instead of acting fortuitously and
rashly, we should behave like rational creatures, by exercising our liberty
and the other faculties be has given us, in the manner most agreeable
to our state and destination, in order to promote his views, and to advance
our own happiness, together with that of our fellow creatures?
IV. These considerations assume a new force, when we attend
to the natural consequences of the opposite system. What would become of
man and society, were every one to be so far master of his actions, as
to do every thing he listed, without having any other principle of conduct
than caprice or passion? Let us suppose, that God, abandoning us to ourselves,
had not actually prescribed any rules of life, or subjected us to laws
, most of our talents and faculties would be of no manner of use to us.
To what purpose would it be for man to believe the light of reason, were
he to follow only the impulse of instinct, without watching over his conduct?
What would it avail him to have the power of suspending his judgment, were
he to yield stupidly to the first impressions? And of what service would
reflection be, were he neither to choose nor deliberate; and