Book Review: A Critique of the New Natural Law Theory by Russell Hittinger

A Critique of the New Natural Law Theory by Russell Hittinger

Natural Law Theory has its roots in the ancient Greco-Roman world, though its greatest flowering has been in Catholic ethical teaching in the Middle Ages. Contemporary ethics shies away from what seems out-of-date and specifically Christian, hence utilitarianism and deontology have become popular. In an attempt to update the theory and establish a starting point not dependent on Christianity, Germaine Grisez and John Finnis have spent much effort in crafting a new theory of Natural Law. They enumerate several goods that are conducive to human fulfillment (e.g., life, knowledge, justice, religion) and explain how these goods are irreducible to each other. Since they are irreducible, these goods cannot be put in a hierarchical order. Since they are specifically human, they ought to be pursued. Morally good behavior acts according to these goods, seeking no particular good in a way that would jeopardize the other goods. Grisez and Finnis establish some first principles of practical reason and morality to guide people on their search for these goods.

In a brilliant analysis of their reflections, Russell Hittinger lays out the basic considerations of the Grisez-Finnis theory of natural law. One of the biggest problems in their theory is what constitutes the good of religion. As one sort of human fulfillment, religion is being open to a relationship with the Being that creates and sustains the world (Grisez has a proof for the existence of an uncaused cause that does not get into specifics about the Creator). How this is meaningfully instantiated is difficult to pin down and shifts based on the acceptance of Christian revelation. Both Grisez and Finnis are Catholics and argue for Christian positions on marriage and contraception. Their new formulation of Natural Law lets them develop other arguments which are less than rigorous and convincing for Hittinger.

The book is not for the faint of philosophy and theology. The discussions are well explained but very technical and get far into the minutia of the Grisez-Finnis theory. It strikes me as written more for an academic community or for people already deeply invested in natural law theory. While he is sympathetic to the endeavor to make natural law more appealing, he does make a good argument that the Grisez-Finnis method does not do the job.

Recommended, with the caveat that you need some prep work beforehand to get the most out of it.