NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE

Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

GE 8 – ETHICS
LEARNING MATERIALS

LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE

a. Natural Law
b. Properties and classifications of natural law
c. Positive Law
d. Conscience

LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After studying this lesson, you should be able to:
a. Elaborate the meaning of Natural Law and its influence on the development of Ethics;
b. Explain the concept of positive law, its role and impact on the science of ethics; and,
c. Explain the meaning of conscience

DISCUSSION:

A. LAW
Morality and law are closely related. Right and wrong, good and bad in human actions
presupposes a law or rule of conduct. Moreover, the laws of the state are restatements,
specifications of an anterior natural moral law.
However, there is a big difference between what is moral and what is legal. The legal only
covers the external acts of man while moral governs even the internal acts of man such as the
volitional and intentional activities of the will and mind. (Example, man’s thought and desires).
Thus, man may commit a thousand murders in his mind and adulteries in his desires, and is,
for these, morally guilty; yet, legally, not criminally liable or guilty. (See Mathew 5:23).

Natural law
The natural law is the code of moral conduct which reason indicates as conformable to human
nature. Man is by nature adapted to live in society. Consequently, his actions are good when it
conform to the welfare of society. Like for instance, telling the truth, obeying lawful authority,
paying one’s debts. On the other hand, actions are bad when it tends to disrupt society, such as
stealing or rebelling against lawful authority. Again, man is by nature a rational being with a
spiritual soul which should keep the desires of the body in proper check. Hence, it is morally good
by the natural law to be temperate and chaste, whereas it is opposed to the natural law to drink to
excess or to seek sexual gratification inordinately. Further, man as a creature of God owes to his
Creator certain duties, such as worship.
Law has two dimensions:
1. It is an expression of an intrinsic human value and of the call of God. Looking from this
perspective, law is internalized. It appears as an invitation to love and as a way of attaining
human perfection. Hence, it is not felt as a burden.
2. It is also a demand and, as such, seems to come from outside and appears like constraint
provoking resistance. It is, therefore, very important in moral education to propose law in
the right perspective, primarily as an expression of a human value. Demand there is, but
the demand must be shown to flow from a value, and the emphasis should clearly be on the
value. Thus, children should be helped to see that, underlying the commandment. “Don’t
lie,” is the value of openness to each other in the spirit of brotherhood.

18
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
 NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

History of the Natural Law Doctrine

To the Greeks, the world in which they lived was a cosmos, an ordered and
harmonious whole. The Stoics, by assuming an immanent Logos in nature and in man,
identified the principle of reason in every individual man with the cosmic order of the
universe.
The Stoics evolved a concept of the natural law that was not much different from
the laws regulating the physical order of the universe. Thus, from the start the concept had
a physical bias among the Greeks, although they were rather flexible in making concrete
application
Later, Roman jurist noted certain common elements amidst the wide variety of laws
and customs of the people that came under the Pax Romana. This was called ius gentium
(low of the nations), distinguished from the ius proper to each nation. It roughly
corresponds to what is referred to as “common law” in Anglo-Saxon countries.
The ius gentium, acknowledged as the work of human reason, was accepted as the
common heritage of all peoples and became a unifying and integrating force in the Empire.
It was practically equivalent to the natural law. However, the Romans ultimately accepted
the Hellenistic view on the basis of the ius naturale. According to the great Roman jurist
Ulpian, it is “that which teaches all animals,” i.e., the law common to man and animals
apart from any intervention of human reason. This posed the danger of identifying natural
law with brute natural tendency.
Christianity. Since, we can see that the origin of the concept of natural law was not so
happy. However, although early Christianity largely derived its semantic framework from
the Greeks and the Romans, it certainly transformed the idea. Apostle Paul, who speaks
about the Gentiles doing by nature what the Jewish Torah requires (Rom 2:14),
immediately adds that the law is written in their “heart.” Hence, the Christian’s view is
more concerned with what is specifically human than with what belongs to the physical
universe or the animal world. St. Augustine on the other hand, links the Platonic-Stoic idea
of the eternal law with the thought of the personal God creating through His eternal Word
(John 1). He derives this idea from the Hebrew tradition, according to which the harmony
observed in nature is not a mechanical unity but one brought about by the personal will of
Yahweh. Nature itself becomes dependable because of the dependable will of Yahweh.
The formulation of the natural law at the hands of the great medieval thinkers saw
a considerable evolution under the influence of the Gospel an centuries of Christian
tradition.
St. Thomas Aquinas, in his great synthesis on law in the Summa Theologica, adopts
a personal perspective. While the Stoic had identified law with the cosmic order, for St.
Thomas the eternal law is the same as God’s wisdom and providence. Man, unlike
irrational beings, participates in this eternal law through reason. Natural law, according to
St. Thomas, consists of certain fundamental moral judgments acquired by intuition and not
by deductive reason. These self-evident principles of the moral order can be reduced to
“Good is to be done, and evil is to be avoided.” Only these first principles are absolutely
universal. Other general laws, derived from these, may perhaps admit of exceptions
because of accidental circumstances.
St. Thomas had distinguished between lex naturalis, or human reason seeking to
regulate total human conduct, and ius naturale, comprising the basic tendencies and
inclinations which needed to be studied empirically and regulated by reason. Later
philosophers reduced natural law to the given aspects of the ius naturale and thereby
19
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
 NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

downplayed the creative and regulative role of reason as well as the function of
empirical investigation.

Other Concepts Relating to the Natural Law

1. Properties of the Natural Law
The natural law exists in its subjects by reason of the fact that it is an integral part
of their very nature. Just as the laws of chemical reaction are inherent in the nature of the
elements, so certain young child who has done wrong—lied, stolen, or the like –feels
uncomfortable, ashamed or frightened, though he has never heard of the moral law. His
reason indicates that some things are wrong by their very nature. We say that such things
are against the natural law.
If anyone, for example, could take the property of others at any time without fault
or blame, no one would have any security in the possession of his property. All effort, all
planning would be useless. Initiative would be stifled. The entire world would be in chaos.
In other words, reason indicates that stealing is wrong. Therefore, we say that stealing is
against the natural law. The same can be said for murder, adultery, rape, lying and a host
of other evils.
Natural law is universal because, being based on human nature, it binds all men. It
is immutable because human nature is the same at all times and in all places. Therefore all
acts contrary to the natural law, such as murder, theft, voluntary direct abortion and
adultery, will always remain immoral. No human authority has the power to dispense, or
abrogate any precept of the natural law.

2. The Ten Commandments

The Ten Commandments are basically a summary of the principles of the natural
law. The only exception to this is the Third Commandment, “Remember to keep the
Sabbath day holy,” which is a divine positive law. Men, even before the Ten
Commandments were given, could tell right from wrong. But men drifted away from God,
and He saw the need of putting His law before them in a striking way, making it stronger
and more explicit than the natural law they already knew.
The entire natural law is not listed in detail in the Ten Commandments. They list
the violations of natural law. For example, “Honor thy Father and thy mother” embraces
by implication all the obligations incumbent upon superiors and inferiors in their relations
with each other. The Commandments make no pretense at being an exhaustive list of every
possible infringement of natural laws. They are a series of important guideposts indicating
the proper line of conduct in various important departments of life.
In the course of human history, we find practically no argument over the authority
of the Ten Commandments. They are so obviously expressive of the law of our nature that
few have been as bold and illogical as to challenge them.

Classification of Precepts of the Natural Law

Precepts embodied in the natural law are classified as universal principles,
immediate conclusion and remote conclusions.
Universal principles of the natural law are those which are so fundamental that they
are known by all men. They are self-evident. For example, it is evident to all that good is
to be done and evil is to be avoided. Immediate conclusions of the natural law are those
which are known by all men apart from very extraordinary cases where culture and
religious training are lacking; for example, God must be worshipped, parents should be
honored.
20
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
 NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

Remote conclusions are those which are deduced from the primary principles by
means of practical reasoning and which may be inadequately grasped by many. For
example, the obligation of restoring to the owner an object which has been found.

The Natural law and Happiness

The natural law is not meant to interfere with our liberty but to guide us in the
proper use of our freedom. A railing is placed on the side of a narrow path along a precipice
not to hinder the people to walk along but to protect them. They are free to step under or
over the railing, but in doing so they only endanger themselves. Man cannot ignore the law
of nature without doing himself harm. The Ten Commandments are a set of God’s
directions on how human beings can avoid harm to themselves and attain happiness both
in this life and in the life to come.

Positive Law
A positive law is a precept imposed by one in authority. In some instances this authority may
be God, as in the many ceremonial laws of the Old Testament or the necessity of baptism stated in
the New Testament. When God is the author of a positive law, it is called “divine positive law.”
In other instances the authority is human, as in the case of taxes and the formalities of a will in
civil law (sometimes called laws of the state), or the obligations of Sunday Mass or Friday
abstinence in ecclesiastic law. This sort of law is called “human law.” The laws of the state are
based on and derived their binding force from the natural moral law. This is evident because before
there was any state to promulgate laws, there was already man, human nature with all the rights,
natural and inherent to it. Our constitution and practically all laws of all nations recognize-
guarantee, defend and conserve- but do not create these rights which are considered all as basic,
fundamental, natural, inherent, and inalienable. Likewise the laws of the land are established for
the general welfare of the governed. When legislators enact laws, they really do not make laws;
they merely re-state, interpret, determine or specify what is contained in a general way in the
natural moral law. Although the content of the natural law embraces all the necessary prescription
required for good moral conduct, only the general principles or precepts are self-evident to human
reason, the details had to be deduced from the general principles by reasoning and this is not easily
and correctly attained by most people. And yet, these specific and detailed prescriptions are those
which regulate conduct of every-day life. Hence, it is necessary to clarify, to interpret correctly, to
determine and specify exactly what is merely contained and prescribed in a general and abstract
way in the natural law and this is precisely is the function of the positive laws; to clarify, and apply
to specific cases, the general principles of the natural moral law. Without positive laws, the moral
law would be subject to the individual interpretations of man and there will arise many conflicting
interpretations and this would inevitably result into social disorder and chaos.
Moreover, we must consider the question of sanctions i.e. reward for the observance of the law
and punishment for its violation. Everybody knows that without the proper sanction, the law can
be easily violated because violators could do so with impunity; and that would destroy the very
fabric of society. The natural law does not provide the punishments for the violations of its laws
in this life other than the loss of peace of mind (remorse of conscience) but such as it is, this is
ineffective as deterrent to violators of the law. Hence the need of laws supplemental with proper
sanctions.
Positive laws, being made by authority, can be changed or abrogated by that same
authority.

21
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
 NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

Laws are made for the purpose of securing the common good. If they are perverted from
this end, they cease to be laws binding in conscience and the government that enforces these laws
is oppressive. Against this tyrannous power the people have the right to resist for this is unjust.
According to Thomas Aquinas, laws can be unjust in two ways: 1. When they are contrary to the
common good. For instance, when a government imposes on subjects a burdensome law which
promote not the good of the people but the selfish interests of the rulers; or, when the rulers enact
laws outside their powers; and, when the laws are discriminatory in their imposition i.e. when the
burdens are imposed unequally on the people. These laws are rather acts of violence than laws and
do not bind in conscience unless perhaps for the avoidance of a greater evil which would ensue
from the non-observance of said laws. 2. Laws can be unjust when they contravene or run counter
to the natural law or the divine law. For example, a law prescribing idolatry and/or the killing of
the aged or those who have incurable disease to solve economic problem. Such laws run counter
to the natural and divine laws and should never be obeyed.
B. CONSCIENCE
The Meaning of the Word “Conscience”
In the popular mind, conscience is that “still small voice within” which tells us
whether we have done right or wrong or, perhaps more importantly, tells us whether the decision
we are considering is a good one or a bad one. According to this definition, conscience is the place
within us where we feel a sense of joy and contentment when we act rightly and a sense of disquiet
and guilt if we act wrongly. Popular definitions like this one can be useful at times, as starting
points, but they are not very accurate, and they do not adequately distinguish conscience from
other factors with which it can easily be confused.
Conscience is a judgment of human reason concerning the moral goodness or evil of one’s
own action.
Conscience is not a separate faculty, a special little voice within us, whispering
suggestions regarding our conduct. It is an act of the human intellect regarding an action with
respect to moral matter. It is a practical judgment of the intellect as to what is right or wrong.

Types of Conscience
Conscience, being an operation of the human intellect, is subject to the shortcomings
of such an intellect. In addition, the operation of conscience implies knowledge, freedom and
reflection. These are variables, and in the light of such variables it is easy to see that a different
judgment may be made by different individuals concerning the morality of the same act. Keeping
those factors in mind, we may enumerate and explain various types of conscience.
In this discussion, we are concerned only with what is called antecedent conscience,
which is a judgment made previous to an act. We are not talking here of consequent conscience,
which is judgment made after an act, such as that in preparation for confession.
a. True and False Conscience. From the viewpoint of the relationship of conscience
to objective truth, conscience may be either true or erroneous.
A true conscience is one which indicates correctly the goodness or badness of
moral conduct.
An erroneous conscience (sometimes called a false conscience) is one which
falsely indicates that a good action is evil or an evil action is good. Since conscience is
nothing more than the operation of the intellect in a particular field, it is apparent that
conscience may be in error. Everyone knows that a human intellect is capable of error.
22
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

The fact that the intellect is operating in the field of morality or the fact that we give it
as special name and call it “conscience” does not confer infallibility. An error of
conscience may at times exists because of some fault on the part of the individual, but
we are here discussing an inculpably conscience. Suppose a student finds out that one
of her classmates has made some uncharitable remarks about her and feels justified in
making slanderous remarks are not, in fact, justified. Therefore, the student is acting
with an erroneous conscience.
Moral Implications of an Inculpably False Conscience. If a person performs an
act that is objectively a light sin, when his conscience tells him it is serious sin, he has
committed a serious sin. A boy who thinks that it is a mortal sin to steal a small amount
of money, and yet deliberately does so, is guilty of a mortal sin.
If a person commits what is objectively a serious sin, truly thinking it is a light
offense, he is guilty only of a light offense. A small boy, although realizing that it is
wrong to strike his mother, thinks that it is not seriously wrong. His conscience is in
error. Although the act was objectively a serious sin, he is only guilty of a slight sin.
We must remember that no one can commit a sin when circumstances force him to
act in a particular way. A Catholic patient who has been told by his doctor that he has
pneumonia and must remain in bed on Sunday commits no sin by missing Mass, no
matter what his confused conscience may tell him. No one is held to the impossible.
b. Certain and Doubtful Conscience. A certain conscience is one which dictates a
course of action in clear terms without fear of error. It clearly labels as good or bad an
action contemplated. A man tempted to seek revenge by committing a murder can
clearly see that he is contemplating the performance of gravely evil act.
A doubtful conscience is one which leaves a person undecided as to the proper
course of action. A Catholic, forgetting that it is Friday, stops at a restaurant and orders
a chicken dinner. Just as he begins to eat the chicken, he remembers what day it is. On
the one hand, he has a problem concerning Church law. On the other hand, he has a
problem concerning his stomach and his public embarrassment. Unable to arrive at a
satisfactory decision, he is a victim of doubtful conscience.

c. Lax, Scrupulous and Tender Conscience. Conscience may err on the side of laxity.
Those with a lax conscience sometimes become persuaded that great sins are
permissible. They find excuses for grave misconduct. Such people often begin by
rationalizing minor faults until their conscience becomes dull and incapable of proper
decision. Example of lax conscience; A doctor reveals a very serious professional
secret to lay people and considers the disclosure mere small talk.
Scrupulous Conscience. Rarer than laxity of conscience is scrupulosity. The
person with a scrupulous conscience sees evil where there is none. St. Francis de Sales
points out that scrupulosity has its source in pride. Let no one think that a scrupulous
conscience is to be admired. Scruples are definite evil, and a tremendous drag upon the
soul—as much to be avoided as laxity. Example of scrupulous conscience. A doctor
engages in hospital small talk with another doctor and then feels guilty of a grave
violation of professional secrecy.
Tender Conscience. A conscience which forms a correct judgment with
comparative facility even in matters which involve a fine distinction is called tender
conscience. It is also sometimes called “delicate conscience.” Such a conscience is
developed by

23
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
 NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

Obligations Relative to Conscience

Do We Have an Obligation to Follow Our Consciences? Conscience judgments
always make use of the word “should”: that is, they are always statements that, in
concrete situations, we should act in one way rather than another. This raises an
interesting question: Is there an absolute obligation to follow one’s own conscience?
The right and duty of following one’s own conscience has become almost the central
moral principle of non-theistic humanism since the Enlightenment, and it is a favorite
slogan of people who talk about ethics from a merely humanist perspective. A good
number of people who would characterize themselves as “humanists” speak of the
serious obligation one has to follow his/her own conscience, and of the obligation
which we have to respect the rights of all people to follow their consciences, as long
as others are not harmed by their actions. We have already pointed out in Chapter I that
statements of this types represent a serious confusion of two quite distinct questions:
the first is the question of the moral responsibility of individual to make good moral
judgments and the second is the question of the purpose and competence of the law.
The Moral Responsibility of the Individual Instead of speaking of following
conscience, we do better to point out that such obligation can exist only if the
conscience and the conscience judgment are good—that is, only if we have used all
reasonable means to discover the real values in life, and to find those ways of acting
which in and of themselves are worthy of being chosen.
Our real obligation is to fashion or to form our consciences in the right way,
and this means simply that we are obliged to commit ourselves willingly and
deliberately to the truth. It means that we are called on to be attentive, open to the truth.
It means that we are called on to be deliberately intelligent, to understand the facts and
principles involved. It means that we are called on to be reasonable, to make serious
efforts to draw correct conclusions from the judgments which we make. And it means
that we are called on to be responsible—that is, to willingly act in the real world in
accordance with the truth which we have found.
To form one’s conscience well is to be deliberately discerning, that is, to strive
to distinguish real values from pseudo-values and to distinguish common sense from
common nonsense. To form one’s conscience is to develop clever plans for protecting
and promoting value and to foresee difficulties which may arise and to devise ways of
circumventing them. To form one’s conscience is to be willing to learn from others, to
observe the way in which intelligent people act now and have acted in the past. To
form one’s conscience is to deliberately do what is in our power to remove ignorance
of facts and of principles. In summary, to form one’s conscience is to be critical, to
examine the judgments which we have made, to ask whether they have been made on
the basis of evidence or on the basis of slogans.
Conscience, Norms and the Law of God. It has been common to say that conscience
is good, in so far as it accepts the law of God, or even that the good conscience is
constituted as such by the acceptance of the law of God, and it is possible to find
phrases to this effect even in the documents of the Second Vatican Council. In using
the term “law of God,” the Council was apparently referring to the will of God, and in
terms of the scholastic philosophy and theology of law, this use of the term makes
sense. However, in a non-scholastic age like the one we live in, “law” is not a good
term to use. It emphasizes the will of the lawmaker at the expense of the intelligence
of those subject to the law, and it almost always connotes the imposition of a sanction.

24
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
 NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

For precisely this reason, it misses the essential relation between conscience and
intelligence.
Conscience and Freedom. It is extremely important to see the conscience judgment
as the exercise of freedom. The word “freedom” here must, of course, be understood
in the proper sense; it does not refer to indifference, or to the power to make arbitrary
and unmotivated choices. Freedom is the power to create the real self—the self which
God calls us to be. Forming conscience in the right way is an essential and, in fact, the
essential exercise of freedom.

LEARNING ASSESSMENT FOR LESSON 3

Activity 1
Law and Conscience

Direction: Read and analyze each statement below. Write the word TRUE if you find the
statement correct but if it is wrong, write FALSE.

Conscience may be in error because human intellect is capable of error.

1.
2. Erroneous conscience falsely indicates that a good action is evil or an evil
action is good.

3. Antecedent conscience, is a judgment made previous to an act.

4. Conscience in its definition as “still small voice within” is not very

accurate.

5. Conscience as a separate faculty, is a special little voice within us,

whispering suggestions regarding our conduct.

6. A patient who has been told by his doctor that he must remain in bed on
Sunday commits no sin by missing Mass/worship service, no matter what his
confused conscience may tell him.

7. When one is unable to arrive at a satisfactory decision, he is a victim of

doubtful conscience.

8. Humanists believes that one has to follow his/her own conscience as long as
others are not harmed by his actions.

9. Our real obligation is not to follow our conscience but to form our
consciences in the right way.

10. Forming conscience in the right way is not an act in the exercise of freedom.

25
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
 NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

Activity 2
Law and Conscience

Essay:
1. If everything governing human conduct is already contained in the natural law as discussed
in this lesson, why do we still need the laws of the state or the so-called human positive laws?

2. In what way/s may a law become unjust? Give example to support your answer?

3. Which prevails in case of conflict between the law of the state and the law of conscience?
Support your answer.

4. Are we morally obliged to obey an unjust law? Give reason for your answer.

5. Explain the difference between the physical and moral law?

26
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE
 NORTH LUZON PHILIPPINES STATE COLLEGE
Adal a dekalidad, dur-as ti panagbiag.

REFERENCES:
A. BOOKS

Babor,E. R., ETHICS: The Philosophical Discipline of Action

Montemayor, F., Ethics: The Philosophy of Life

Padilla, R., Ethics, Principles and Analysis of Contemporary Moral Problems

27
LESSON 3. LAW AND CONSCIENCE