Skip to main content

Posts

The Core Conflict: Ius vs. Rights In Aquinas’s original Latin, the word ius (right) means "the right thing itself" or "that which is just" in a specific situation. It is an objective standard. For Aquinas, a ruler or a judge looks at a situation to determine the fair distribution of duties and goods. Maritain, writing in the wake of World War II, translated this into the language of modern subjective rights—possessions that belong to the individual. The critique you shared argues that by making this leap, Maritain lost Aquinas's structural foundation. Instead of deriving rights from a rigorous cosmic order, Maritain essentially adopted the modern Western political values of his time and tried to overlay a Catholic vocabulary onto them.

To understand why the author critiques Maritain so sharply, it helps to contrast his modern, rights-focused framework with St. Thomas Aquinas’s original view of natural law , which is rooted in objective order and human nature. Here is a direct comparison of how their views differ across core philosophical dimensions: Dimension St. Thomas Aquinas (Classical Natural Law) Jacques Maritain (Modern Personalist Framework) Primary Focus Objective Right ( Ius ) & Obligations . The focus is on what is objectively fair in a relationship and what a person owes to God, neighbors, and the community. Subjective Natural Rights . The focus shifts to what the individual is entitled to possess or claim against others and the state. Source of Rights The Rational Cosmic Order . Human reason discovers the natural law by reflecting on human nature, cosmic order, and God's eternal law. Human Dignity & Personalism . Rights stem from the unique, transcendent value of the human person, heavily in...
Post a Comment
Read more
Recent posts

Ultimately, the text views Maritain's framework as a flawed, historically conditioned compromise that deeply influenced modern Catholic social teaching (such as Vatican II's Dignitatis humanae), but lacks the timeless validity of classical natural law

Maritain does not grasp St. Thomas's view, simply remarking that in antiquity and the Middle Ages the natural law was focused on obligations rather than rights. 100 In the absence of criteria for determining their scope, the rights postulated by Maritain are in effect no more than a list of desirable objectives to be pursued. Maritain distinguishes between rights that can be limited by the demands of the common good, and those that are inalienable. He does not offer criteria for distinguishing between the two, and the examples of inalienable rights that he gives-those of life and the pursuit of happiness-do not have any evident characteristics that identify them as being inalienable, except for their having been so described in the American Declaration of Independence (no doubt a reflection of Maritain's sojourn in America). One need not labor the point that this account of natural law and natural rights does not stand up to examination. In addition to its influence on Vatican ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Line from Suárez to Maritain By tracing this trajectory, Villey shows that modern secular philosophers like Hobbes and Locke did not invent subjective rights out of thin air. They merely secularized the legal architecture built by the late Catholic Scholastics. [1] When Jacques Maritain tried to rescue modern human rights by anchoring them back in Catholic personalism, Villey viewed it as a flawed endeavor. Maritain was using a vocabulary born from the baroque degradation of Thomism, mistaking a modern system of individualized claims for the classical natural law of Aquinas. [1]

Yes, looking closer at Michel Villey’s critique of the baroque Scholastics is essential to understanding how the concept of human rights was decoupled from traditional classical natural law. [ 1 ] Villey (1914–1988), an influential French legal philosopher, argued that the modern crisis of law stems from a subtle but devastating intellectual shift that occurred between the high Middle Ages (Aquinas) and the Early Modern "Baroque" period. [ 1 , 2 ] The primary target of Villey's critique was the Second Scholasticism —specifically thinkers like the Jesuit Francisco Suárez (1548–1617) . Villey argued that these baroque theologians unwittingly laid the groundwork for modern secular individualism by redefining the core structure of justice. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] 1. From "Answering Rightly" to "Arriving at the Right Answer" The quote in your first prompt references Villey’s idea that the baroque Scholastics substituted a concern with answering rightly for a concer...
Post a Comment
Read more

Lamont: Maritain takes the nature of the individual human as the foundation for natural law, following the standard modern natural-law approach. 93 However, warned by the example of his predecessors, he does not attempt logically to deduce the principles of the natural law, or natural rights, from this nature. He denies that the natural law can be known by reason, 94 and asserts that it is grasped by the nonconceptual inclinations of the person

ttps://isidore.co/misc/Res%20pro%20Deo/Journals/The%20Thomist%20(1941-2024)/OCR-layer-only-PDFs/2009_Volume73_Number2.pdf The failure of modern natural-law theories is apparent in one of their more recent versions, that of Mounier's mentor Jacques Maritain. Maritain takes the nature of the individual human as the foundation for natural law, following the standard modern natural-law approach. 93 However, warned by the example of his predecessors, he does not attempt logically to deduce the principles of the natural law, or natural rights, from this nature. He denies that the natural law can be known by reason, 94 and asserts that it is grasped by the nonconceptual inclinations of the person, which are the song produced in the subject by the undermine his documentation of Mounier's views. Mounier mocked Georges Bernanos for broadcasting on the BBC in favor of the Resistance (see Michel Winock, Histoire politique de la revue 'Esprit' [Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1975], 209),...
Post a Comment
Read more