The natural law tradition has been central since our country’s founding and throughout her greatest reform movements.
The founders of America’s free government firmly believed in both the dignity of the person and in the existence of a timeless, rationally knowable natural law that reflected the intentions of the Creator—which most of them thought could be known even more reliably through the study of sacred scripture. Indeed, the Constitution’s famous refusal to establish a single church in the United States was the fruit of a well-founded Protestant concern for liberty of worship—and not of a Deist disdain for outmoded religious dogmas.
The overpowering legitimacy which most Americans for most of our history granted the appeal to religious sources as ways to correctly interpret the rights asserted by the nation’s founding documents can be seen in the extended national argument over slavery. In the course of this decades-long debate, pamphleteers, scholars, and legislators made repeated appeals to the Bible, both in defense of slavery, and in building up the powerful abolitionist movement, which found its most reliable spokesmen among the ministers of New England. So critical were churchmen to the political debate over the moral status of slaves that religious denominations, such as the Baptists, split into southern and northern denominations over this question. Classical formulations of natural law, such as Aristotle’s, had made room for slavery—the cornerstone of the social order in classical Greece, which only the radical Sophists would dare to question. But the Christian notion of the person as the image of God, redeemed and elevated to sonship with God through the incarnation of the Son of God in the form of a human person, had rendered slavery an anomaly, a pagan holdover that could be rendered repugnant to Christians through prophetic speech and action. The first great abolitionist movement, which arose in England under the leadership of William Wilberforce, was wholly the product of the Methodist movement in English churches.
As the abolitionist movement grew in strength, its leaders would use the Declaration as its chief rhetorical weapon, pointing out the stark hypocrisy of slave masters who cherished their “liberty.” While they never won a national consensus for outlawing slavery, the abolitionists did successfully render that institution disgraceful to most non-Southerners, such that Americans of other regions opposed its expansion into new, Western states—and were outraged when the Fugitive Slave Act compelled Northern, free states to act as slave catchers. The election of Abraham Lincoln was the expression of this outrage. While he fought first to save the Union, Lincoln saw in the midst of war an opportunity: by tying the fight for Union to the cause of Emancipation, he made of the Civil War a crusade for America’s founding principles—which relied for their legitimacy on the existence of a transcendent moral order (the laws of “Nature’s God”).
If you’re reading this article, it’s thanks to the generosity of people like you, who have made Aleteia possible.
Here are some numbers:
- 20 million users around the world read Aleteia.org every month
- Aleteia is published every day in eight languages: English, French, Arabic, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Polish, and Slovenian
- Each month, readers view more than 50 million pages
- Nearly 4 million people follow Aleteia on social media
- Each month, we publish 2,450 articles and around 40 videos
- We have 60 full time staff and approximately 400 collaborators (writers, translators, photographers, etc.)
As you can imagine, these numbers represent a lot of work. We need you.
Support Aleteia with as little as $1. It only takes a minute. Thank you!