1
The Line Through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction
Book Review 1
Nicholas Merritt
PLCY701: Natural Law, The State & The Gospel
Dr. Jesse Chupp
July 11, 2021
2
Introduction
The concept of natural law has been the basis of philosophical arguments for over two
centuries. World renown philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero have all provided their
input and thoughts on not only what natural law is, but how it can be applied to policy, decision
making, and every day actions. Although all three philosophers offered separate viewpoints on
natural law, there were commonalities in their discussions which included rights and human
nature. First, that all of humanity intrinsically have values that encapsulate good and evil.
Secondly, that all humanity are born with inherent rights which are granted not by government,
but by God1. In Budziszewski’s book, The Line Through the Heart, Natural Law as Fact,
Theory, and Sign of Contradiction, the author discusses the major and minor aspects of natural
law, as well as the breakdown of his identified two types of law, which are moral and political
law. Furthermore, Budziszewski offers the historical philosophical and political perspective of
natural law as it pertains to good and evil in human nature2. Considered a pioneer in philosophy
and specializing in natural law for the past twenty years, the Texas professor, Budziszewski is
one of the foremost authorities on natural law.
Moral Law
Budziszewski provides a more reality-based approach to explaining natural law in this
book as opposed to a more complicated metaphysics approach. The author relates the topic to
real world application when he discusses natural law within political law and moral law. He
relates these topics to how they affect humanity on an everyday scale3. Because of this,
1 John L. Hill, After the Natural Law: How the Classical Worldview Supports Our Modern Moral and Political
Values (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2016), 1.
2 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
3 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
3
Budziszewski join the likes of some of the greatest thinkers in human history. Plato, Aristotle,
Cicero, and many more have discussed natural law paired with real world applications.
According to Aristotle, this is what separates mankind from animals, the ability to knowingly
decide right from wrong. What was less clear to Aristotle was whether these choices made by
humanity are because of our duties to God, or our duties to mankind. Whether or not
government, God, or in some situations both, dictate the decisions we make.
One comparison of Aristotle’s that Budziszewski echoes is that although they are related,
natural law differs from natural justice. Our own Natural law comes from the heavens and justice
is done here on earth4. Aristotle believed that what defines humanity is knowing the difference
between good and evil. Perhaps the most important components of natural law consists of
ethics, values, and morals. The author begins his argument with the personal thoughts of natural
law from Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Even before his days as the Pope,
Ratzinger held a strong viewpoint on religious and ethical values as the foundation of
Democracy. In an address to the United Nations General Assembly, Ratzinger declared that
human rights must be respected as an expression of justice5. Budziszewski and Ratzinger
characterize natural law as the human rights we are all born with, and the battle of good versus
evil. This characterization falls directly in line with the teachings of Aristotle, Plato, and Cicero.
The thought that natural law, or human rights and good versus evil are facts, and they are
indisputable. The author relates these facts to theories; however, he then points out how the
aspects of natural law contradict themselves.
4 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
5 Ronald Ketteler, “Pope Benedict Xvi and the Moral Structure of Human Rights,” Catholic Conference of
Kentucky (blog), March 9, 2012, http://ccky.org/2012/06/pope-benedict-xvi-and-the-moral-structure-of-human-
rights/.
4
Citizenship and Statesmanship
Citizenship is defined as a participating member of a community meeting the legal
requirements of the governing authority6. The participation aspect of this definition specify refers
to the participation into politics. It is important to remember that citizenship always comes
before statesmanship. One cannot be a statesman without first becoming a citizen. Aristotle
believed that individuals gained citizenship not just from their ancestral connections, but
personal relationships as well, which were essential for the success of mankind, you do not have
to be blood related to gain citizenship7. Cicero went a step further in his assessment on
citizenship in that he compared citizenship to goodness, if citizens put the good of the state first,
the state will return the favor8.
Aristotle tied goodness not with citizenship, but with statesmanship. Without realizing it,
the two are intertwined. Aristotle held that statesman are elected to make decisions for the greater
good of society, when statesman make those decisions, society flourishes. Not only do statesman
make decisions for the prosperity if the citizens they represent, statesman are citizens
themselves. Thus society cannot have one without the other. Plato spoke on citizenship as an
inheritance, and not a personal relationship. The philosopher also made the connection between
goodness and citizenship like his counterparts. Plato believed that citizens of society must
participate, whether that be to vote or to contribute to the community, but also obey the laws of
the society, utilizing their God given ability to choose right from wrong9.
6 “Center for the Study of Citizenship.” Accessed July 18, 2021. http://www.clas.wayne.edu/Citizenship/Definition-
of-Citizenship.
7 Chupp, Jesse. Natural Law, the State, and the Gospel. Liberty University. Accessed July 18, 2021.
8 Tollenaar, Isobel. “Cicero’s civitas: Friendship as Fundamental to Citizenship.” diss., Depaul University, 2019.
9 Leydet, Dominique, "Citizenship", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition), Edward N.
Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/citizenship/>.
5
Plato
Plato talks about this in his dialogue, The Republic. The fact and theory of Natural Law is
discussed in great length. As it pertains to natural law, Plato makes the argument that goes
against that of law created by humanity. When mankind creates laws, they do so based on
actuality instead of their own natural thought processes10. These laws, similar to the morality of
killing Hitler for the good of mankind, are created for the good of mankind. This causes a
contradiction between moral law and natural law because the end state for said goals are for the
benefit of society, however if certain decisions, that are morally wrong, but benefit society, one
would violate the theory of natural law. Mankind, when given the freedom to make their own
decisions will create laws that do not benefit society, but instead, fulfill their own personal
desires. Philosopher and law expert John Finnis described these laws to be unjust, and that unjust
laws contradict natural law as they do not truly benefit society11.
Budziszewski does come to agreement with Aristotle when he discusses natural law over
law created by mankind. Not only is natural law a fact, it is simply better than any law created by
man. Natural law is inherent to the creation of man and is based on principles and truth. It is
universal, external, and absolute12. This is because natural law is commanded on us by God. Our
own man-made laws come from constructs in our mind. The mind that can so easily give in to
the desires of the flesh and reflect the evil that goes against God. What separates the two can be
drawn down to compliance. Going against natural law creates a fear of judgement by God,
whereas going against man-made laws create a fear on punishment here on Earth. These facts
10 Taylor, C. and Kraut, R., 1997. Plato's Republic. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp.31-45.
11 John M. Finnis Unjust Laws in a Democratic Society: Some Philosophical and Theological Reflections, 71 Notre
Dame L. Rev. 595 (1995-1996)
12 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
6
prove that natural law is far superior than man-made law because we are granted natural law
from the creator himself, there could be no more perfect source. In his teachings, Plato would
agree with this absolute fact, because the natural law is inherent to all mankind, so all mankind is
inherently good, it is the creation of law by man that can be swayed by the temptations of our
own reality13.
Budziszewski and Plato do not come to an agreement on all things natural law. With
natural law, comes natural goodness found in all of mankind, this is where the philosophers
disagree. Both Budziszewski and Plato agree on the reality that is natural goodness, however the
source of that goodness is a matter of debate. Budziszewski believes that the natural goodness in
all of mankind is inherently given to them by God, therefore, each person has an inherent
knowledge of right versus wrong14. Plato believes that human’s decision between good and evil
lies within their own reasoning, and that we as a society are not automatically born with the
knowledge of right from wrong15. Plato attributes this thought process to the concept that Gods
are simply creations of mankind which brings us to the conclusion that goodness is also a human
invention, leading to the result that the natural good comes from our own thought processes.
Budziszewski makes an outstanding rebuttal to this argument by Plato in The Line
Through the Heart. He makes the point that natural law comes before all of mankind, before
mankind existed, natural law was created by God. For this reason, goodness or God cannot
simply be a creation of the human mind. Circling back to Plato and his theories of the origins of
natural law, he proclaimed that because natural law is a creation of the human mind, law here on
13 Taylor, C. and Kraut, R., 1997. Plato's Republic. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp.31-45.
14 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
15 Murphy, Mark, "Perfect Goodness", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019 Edition), Edward N.
Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/perfect-goodness/>.
7
earth should be created and enforced only by the educated peoples of society, himself included16.
Plato’s thought process behind this deduction is because he believed that less educated people of
society would create laws and idea based on passion and impulse, rather than benefitting the
natural good of society.
Budziszewski disagrees with Plato again with this point. He does not equate morals with
a human being’s intellect. More intelligent human beings do not necessarily have to be engraved
with morals17. However, it is the conscious that is directly correlated with the morals of a human.
Therefore, if someone is in a position to make decisions or create laws based on their intellect, as
Plato would have intended, that does not mean they will make the moral decision or law that will
better society. This is the point the author makes against Plato in the book. You do not have to be
intellectual to make good or bad choices. Budziszewski believes that because of this, natural law
is the highest form of justice, despite the fact that man made laws exist18.
Aristotle
According to Aristotle, natural law is encompassed by the pre-cursor of goodness, and all
mankind have the ability to make decisions which can lead to good or evil. One of the first
decisions in history that lead to evil can be found in the Book of Genesis. Eve made the choice to
eat the apple after being told not to by God. The innocence shared by the first humans on Earth
was replaced with disobedience, a choice made against goodness. This is what Budziszewski
16 Hans Kelsen, Plato and the Doctrine of Natural Law, 14 Vanderbilt Law Review 23 (1960) Available at:
https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol14/iss1/3
17 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
18 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
8
describes as a contradiction of natural law. “Our condition contradicts our constitution; our state
is out of joint with our nature, our actual inclinations are at war with our natural inclinations, we
demand to have happiness on terms that make happiness possible19”. These words from the
author could not provide a clearer understanding of the theory of goodness and the concept of
natural law. It is in our human nature to be good, but also to make our own decisions, which can
lead to evil, thus the contradiction of natural law.
Most of all, Budziszewski believes that natural law is an indisputable fact and if one were
to participate in law, justice, and ethics here on earth, one cannot get away with avoiding natural
law. His opinion denounces the secular morality that historical philosophers advocate for20.
Philosophers like Plato, and Aristotle, trended toward human based morals and laws. Natural law
is and will remain superior to all other systems in that because of humanity’s tendency to commit
sin, they cannot be trusted to maintain a moral ground. The author does mention that humanity
does have a moral ground they use as a basis for the decisions they make. This inherent morality
should in theory lead to good decision making which will lead to a prosperous society according
to Plato21. This leads to the author unequivocally proclaiming that Natural Law is in the very
DNA of all humanity.
Budziszewski further discusses this fact in his breakdown of moral law and
Utilitarianism. Jeremy Benton, the creator of Utilitarianism, believes that the decisions we make
are just and good only if all of society benefits from them. An example of this would be that
although to murder someone would be wrong, murdering someone like Adolf Hitler would have
19 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
20 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
21 Taylor, C. and Kraut, R., 1997. Plato's Republic. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp.31-45.
9
been a good thing, since all of humanity would have benefitted from it. In Budziszewski’s
analysis, this simply cannot be the case. Natural law judges us all, regardless of the reasoning
behind an action, it is our conscience that we as individuals must face when we make a decision
that is morally wrong. It is a fact that natural law is within all mankind, and we must face the
consequences of our actions regardless on the intent behind them.
Cicero
Not as well discussed as his counterparts Plato, and Aristotle, Cicero is just as historically
important as his counterparts, and also spoke on natural law during his time. Using Plato’s The
Republic as a guide, Cicero authored six books of dialogue, entitled, On the Republic. With
Plato’s works as a guide, Cicero went one step further by declaring that thinking deeply can lead
the intellectual mind to what he called the common law of nature. In a somewhat unique
presentation of natural law, Cicero used characters in his dialogue to describe natural law itself.
The characters he creates debate the concept of natural law, where one of the main characters is
for and another character is against natural law22. The character that supports natural law is
Laelius, and the character that is against natural law is given the name Philus by Cicero.
The character Laelius produces the main argument that because true law exists, all other
laws are meaningless. Philus claims that there can be no natural law because of the differences in
culture and background society has. Because of the differences of society, there are always
disagreements between people of all intellects, including philosophers23. Philus believes that if
natural law did exist, then people of the same cultural background should, in theory, have the
22 Alonso, Fernando H. Llano. "Cicero and Natural Law." ARSP: Archiv Für Rechts- Und Sozialphilosophie / Archives for
Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy 98, no. 2 (2012): 157-68. Accessed July 10, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/24769084.
23 Alonso, Fernando H. Llano. "Cicero and Natural Law." ARSP: Archiv Für Rechts- Und Sozialphilosophie / Archives for
Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy 98, no. 2 (2012): 157-68. Accessed July 10, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/24769084.
10
same viewpoint, which is simply not true. Cicero did publish his own personal thoughts on
natural law in his dialogue, On the Laws. Cicero himself believes in natural law which would
lead one to wonder if he was using the character Laelius as his own alias. Where natural law
originates from in humanity is what sets Cicero apart from his counterparts. He believed that
humans have been engraved with natural law by nature itself24.
As it pertains to the location of natural law in humanity, Cicero combines the beliefs of
both Budziszewski and Plato. Cicero put forth the idea that natural law and the goodness of a
person is given to each individual by nature, a thought from Budziszewski. However, natural law,
and right from wrong come from one’s own decision making process in the mind. Cicero
confirms this ideology by claiming that both knowing the difference between right and wrong
come natural to human beings, and they are also naturally good and evil. Under Cicero’s beliefs,
human beings are born with the ability to know the difference between right from wrong.
Budziszewski uses the same theoretical principles when describing the over arching concept of
natural law.
In the book, Budziszewski tells us that each individual is born with inherent morality,
granted to them by nature. Their intellect is not fully developed until later in life, therefore, the
ability to know right from wrong comes not only easily to them, but naturally. While Cicero does
believe in the existence of natural good, especially when it comes to certain aspects of natural
goodness, he does claim that there must be some certain degree of intelligence in the decision-
making process. Becoming contradictory to Budziszewski’s argument, Cicero begins his assault
on the topic of secular morality. The separation of church and state must be put into place in
24 Elizabeth Asmis; Cicero on Natural Law and the Laws of the State. Classical Antiquity 1 April 2008; 27 (1): 1–33.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/ca.2008.27.1.1
11
order for Cicero and his words to make sense25. Secularity goes against everything that
Budziszewski believes in, leading to the largest difference in philosophers between the author
and the historical giants.
The idea of goodness for the benefit of society is brought into the spotlight with Cicero as
it pertains to humanity living amongst each other. Cicero believes if society benefits from the
harm of one or a small group of individuals, the common good of society is worth the sacrifice26.
The amount or extent of harm done to the individual is not as easy as it sounds as according to
Cicero. In the scenario of harm for the greater good, it is difficult to determine the scale of harm
to one or more individuals when you are talking about the benefit of all of society for the greater
good. The two cannot simply be compared.
Conclusion
Budziszewski and what some would consider his opus, The Line Through the Heart:
Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction, the author compares many of his
philosophies on natural law to some of the greatest thinkers the world has ever seen. Great
thinkers such as Cicero, Plato, and Aristotle all gave their opinions on natural law along with
Budziszewski, and although the philosophers had disagreements on a variety of specifics as it
relates to natural law, the overall opinions on natural law are very similar between the quartet.
The fact that Budziszewski was able to create parallels between his thoughts on natural law, and
those of some of the greatest thinkers of all time, show not only the work that the author put into
the novel, but the level of knowledge and wisdom he has on the topic of philosophy. What is
more astounding, is that with all of his knowledge on natural law, he did not write the book with
25 Alonso, Fernando H. Llano. "Cicero and Natural Law." ARSP: Archiv Für Rechts- Und Sozialphilosophie / Archives for
Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy 98, no. 2 (2012): 157-68. Accessed July 10, 2021.
26 Zetzel, James EG. "Natural Law and Poetic Justice: A Carneadean Debate in Circero and Virgil.” Classical
Philology 91, no. 4 (1996): 297-317
12
the goal of hyping up the historical philosophers or calling out attention to the deficiencies on
their works. The focus of the book was natural law and how it is a fact of humanity and it is
something that has importance in all of our lives, for the reason that we are all born with the
concept of natural law.
In my opinion, Budziszewski accomplished his mission in writing the book and the
message he wanted to portray. One last difference between the author and the three philosophers
is that he simplified the language and created real world applications for natural law. Plato,
Aristotle, and Cicero, can at times be difficult to decipher as the world has changed so much
since they were alive, some of their thoughts simply just don’t apply in today’s society. I feel as
though this book was written specifically to explain natural law to the common man and woman.
After reading this novel, I now have a better understanding of natural law and how I can apply it
to todays world thanks to Budziszewski. The author finishes strong in the book posing a paradox
for readers to continue on their quest for knowledge. He says, “In this country, for the
foreseeable future, the chief danger to religious toleration arise not from our avowed religions,
but from the unavowed and illiberal religion of liberalism itself”27. I think the Book of Romans
best describes natural law as it applies to the lives of mankind in 2:12-16, Natural Law “When
Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to
themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written
on their hearts”.
27 J Budziszewski, The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction (Wilmington,
DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011), 1
13
Bibliography
Alonso, Fernando H. Llano. "Cicero and Natural Law." ARSP: Archiv Für Rechts- Und
Sozialphilosophie / Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy 98, no. 2 (2012): 157-68.
Accessed July 10, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24769084.
Asmis Elizabeth; Cicero on Natural Law and the Laws of the State. Classical Antiquity 1 April
2008; 27 (1): 1–33. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/ca.2008.27.1.1
Budziszewski, J. The Line through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of
Contradiction. Wilmington, DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2011.
“Center for the Study of Citizenship,” accessed July 18,
2021, http://www.clas.wayne.edu/Citizenship/Definition-of-Citizenship.
14
Chupp, Jesse. Natural Law, the State, and the Gospel. Liberty University. Accessed July 18,
2021.
Finnis, J. Unjust Laws in a Democratic Society: Some Philosophical and Theological
Reflections, 71 Notre Dame L. Rev. 595 (1995-1996)
Hans Kelsen, Plato and the Doctrine of Natural Law, 14 Vanderbilt Law Review 23 (1960)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol14/iss1/3
Hill, John, After the Natural Law: How the Classical Worldview Supports Our Modern Moral
and Political Values (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2016), 1.
Ketteler, Ronald. “Pope Benedict Xvi and the Moral Structure of Human Rights.” Catholic
Conference of Kentucky (blog), March 9, 2012. http://ccky.org/2012/06/pope-benedict-xvi-and-
the-moral-structure-of-human-rights/.
Leydet, Dominique, "Citizenship", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition),
Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/citizenship/>.
Murphy, Mark, "Perfect Goodness", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019
Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/perfect-goodness/>.
Taylor, C. and Kraut, R., 1997. Plato's Republic. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers,
pp.31-45.
Tollenaar, Isobel. “Cicero’s civitas: Friendship as Fundamental to Citizenship.” diss., Depaul
University, 2019.
15
Wainwright, William, "Concepts of God", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring
2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/concepts-god/>.
Zetzel, James EG. "Natural Law and Poetic Justice: A Carneadean Debate in Cicero and Virgil."
Classical Philology 91, no. 4 (1996): 297-317
