SAINT AUGUSTINE AND THOMAS HOBBES ON DOCTRINE OF LEX INJUSTA NON EST LEX
2nd Year &3rd Sem
Faculty in charge-
National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTERIZATION PAGE NUMBER
1.1 Literature Review………………………………………………..
1.2 Scope and Objectives……………………………………………
1.3 Research Methodology…………………………………………..
1.4 Research Questions………………………………………………
2. Idea of law……………………..…………………………………….
3. Doctrine of Lex injusta non est lex…………………………………….
4. St. Augustine on Lex injusta non est lex……………………………….
5.Thomas Hobbes on Lex injusta non est lex……………………………….
6. Similarities and Differences between them
DOCTRINE OF LEX INJUSTA NON EST LEX-
Lex injusta non est lex is a maxim.The maxim lex injusta non est lex means unjust law is not a law. It is a natural law approach which is referred to understand law. It has originated from Saint Augustine and is also present in the works of Saint Thomas Aquinas. This principle states that a law will be called as a law if it is moral and if any law that is immoral will not be considered as law. The area of law where morality has an influence on is the criminal law. There are certain things derived from the general principles of natural law by the way of conclusion for example one must not kill it can also be derived from this principle that no one should do harm to no man . The natural law theory is directly attached to justice and if anyone tries to create a law which will be evil then it will fail to have an effect. People living in society can question it that what role does morality plays in law since the powerful people or individuals for example politics decide what the law should be, but law is made to maintain peace and security or social order at times when conflicts arises or exists between individuals or group. Legal norms are being described as higher norms and are compared to standards, higher laws which evolved from the divine revelation for example religious text or human nature. This viewpoint is accepted that morals naturally exist in every human being. Morals have been defined as a set of rules that are to be followed by the individuals. Morality is also concerned with beliefs which means that religion also plays an important role of influence. A set of variant morals would exit in different cultures if religion is influenced by morals. Morals differ from person to person or individual to individual because it is difficult to conceptualize something like morals to such a diverse world. The relationship of law and morality is essential because it identifies how people should behave. Morality is required for law but law is not required for morality and their relationship exists by chance but it should not exist. There is no clear dissection between the notion of law and the notion of morality and there are some laws that depend on the moral standards of humans.
Positive law has been derived from natural law, it maintains that law and morality are in two different spheres and that a law will only be valid when it has been established by a society in correspondence with the procedures identified by that society, hence humans make their own laws. The definitions provided by Aquinas and Cicero are very dated, their approach to analysis may not have been systematic and it is very difficult to define whether or not laws are valid. Bentham supported the idea of legal positivism, his belief was that law is an instrument of social change and has the function of affecting the future instead of always being retrospective. Legal positivists try and detach law from morality, the reasons for this is that they believe morals just confuse laws, hence making it even more difficult to give society justice.
Augustine is the propounder of secular ideas of natural law. He was the first who came up with the Christian theory of Natural Law. He was very familiar with the stoic philosophy and Ciecro mainly his writings. Augustine talked about lex temporalis which will be valid only if all of its qualities of eternal law are fulfilled by any legislation and then only it would be named as a law. Later, he talked about De Vera Religione and did not say that if any legislation fails to fulfill all the qualities of eternal law will be called as invalid but will be called as temporal legislator, who will be wise enough to learn eternal law and apply it at times where there be unchanging rules. In Augustine’s view these changes occurred due to transforming understanding of earthly existence of man. He describes man as a foreigner, whose real home lies somewhere else and he can only link it by hope. And should follow that no human institution can be an agency of perfection.
He then talked about the classical view of nature as a cosmos which includes human world, where he argued that creation of man introduced radical division in the universe . In order to understand Augustine’s view of law, firstly it is very essential to have a look on the radical division in the universe that is the human world. And in the human world there are acts of human will which is different from nature and God. Divine reason which orders the universe cannot continue with human reason. Men calls crime which is not a sin in the eyes of God here, Augustine says that if this wrongdoing remain unpunished on earth and consist sins because god is concerned with the inner state of human soul . God is being praised by humans and nothing is hidden from him. Human beings cannot control their destiny and salvation, As the pagan philosophers believed because perfection cannot be achieved on earth. Perfection can only be found in the society where angels and saints live and that is heaven. But, humans still try hard to achieve perfection by their efforts and the human condition is a tragedy.
The Christian recognizes that there is no bridge the chasm between his yearning for perfection and what he can do to achieve it. Augustine described this chasm as a dichotomy between two cities, the earthly and heavenly. He says that these cities are made up of two different loves firstly, the earthly love of self, even to the contempt of God and secondly, the heavenly by the love of God, even to the contempt of self.(footnote) He said that it is impossible to think of getting a membership in heavenly city only by observing the behavior of a person. No performances are being required for being a part of heavenly city. Their membership depends on the things they love.
And therefore, heavenly city cannot be shaped by law. Law can distribute and protect property but it cannot decide the spirit in which property is used. Law can punish the wrong done to others but it cannot punish wrongful loving.(footnote) That is the reason no city can ensure membership in the heavenly city not even the Christian theocracy. The heavenly city finds its members in every nation and every state and mostly among diverse habits and customs. Augustine rejects both apocalyptic view, which is hostile to the civil order of Rome and Eusebian view. Christianity was being identified with the Roman Empire. Later, he emphasizes that we can make an exception that the citizens of both the cities live a common life with the people who are not similar to them and their city cannot be identified. Augustine denied the classical view. He says that the need for civil association is intrinsic to man’s rational nature. He attributes the divorce of the earthly from the heavenly city to man’s fall. He says that men have fallen because they make decision and things other than God the object of their love and they divert form their purposes. Their diversity brings them into conflict with one another. There is another reason for conflict as well where men impose their will on other where they are driven by a passion to dominate. And as a result, humans are always threatened by violence from their fellow beings and nothing is social by nature and antisocial by human race. And in order to live in peace and security from violence, men need a civil order. Civil order is the means of remedy to come out of the sinfulness instead of perfection. Civil order is a precarious remedy because it is a pure human arrangement that keeps chaos away. The understanding of civil order for Augustine made him impossible to accept the classical view of law. Moral life was identified with the civil order and for Augustine moral life is completely independent and personal of the civil order. Christian, Membership in a particular community will not be the sense of identity but one’s faith that the will of the world will be transformed when Christ will defeat sin and death. And this entire transformation depends on the will of God and if anyone supposes that the earthly project can bring the transformation then it displays a sinful pride. And if any one who can deny that our upcoming future will be the most blessed one when we
compare it with our present life which is most wretched whether it is filled with happiness and blessings. And if this life is used with a reference to other which is being loved by a man then he can be called as a blessed not in reality but in hope. But, the happiness of this life with actual possession and without hope is a false happiness and profound misery. The true blessings are not enjoyed. Because, every earthly project is considered irrelevant by the Christian to his ultimate allegiance he will be considered as alien to whatever community he belongs to and his interest is not with shaping that community to a specific pattern but with defending the area he is left with.
In the classical order there is a tension between polis as an educational enterprise and polis as an association significant by diversity which vanishes in Augustine’s idea of civil order. And civil order is not regarded as a natural organic unity and was specified by the word called societas. Societas, is an association or group which is initiated by an agreement among individuals where individuals have their own interests which are opposed by the universitas. Here, universitas is something which indicates an aggregate that has the unity of natural person
Thomas Hobbes is considered as a believer or supporter of natural law. The theory of natural law of Hobbes is based on natural rights of self- preservation of person and property. Hobbes had used natural law to provide absolute authority of the ruler by giving me power to protect his subjects. Thus he completely condemned the religious and metaphysical character as natural law. The theory of Hobbes is based on social contract. He engaged himself in the civil war between King Charles-I and British Parliament and helped the King. And therefore, he shores up with absolute power and authority of the ruler. He also agreed with the ideal principles underlying natural law but did not present it as acceptance for its deficiency in the saction which in the view of Hobbes was necessary to command obedience from people.
In social contract Hobbes says that man lives in a society which is chaotic and there is always tension of fear. In state of nature life was solitary, nasty, poor, short and brutish. Men entered into a contract in order to remain safe self- protection and avoid misery and pain, they gave up all their freedom to mightiest authorities who had powers to protect their lives and property. This lead the way to emergence of the institution of the ruler which had next assumed the form of the state. Hobbes was proponent of absolute power of the ruler and also to the subjects which had no rights in opposition to the sovereign who was to be ruled by unworthy or bad. And Church had no power over the sovereign. The theory of natural law was only assisted by Hobbes for absolute authority of the ruler. In “leviathan”, which is his popular work, which appeared in the year 1651. There he discovered that law is based on the sanction of the sovereign. And therefore, He repeated that civil law is the real law since it is prescribed by the sovereign.
According to Saint Augustine natural law is something which have propounded certain rights by the dignity of human nature commonly by God and can be followed through human reasons.
And, according to Thomas Hobbes