Ius Naturale is Law Natural. Why would I use latin words? To contrast with Lex Naturale. There is good reason. Ius naturale, and lex naturale, both refer to natural law. Not only is this confusing, plagiarised meaning is worse than ambiguous.
What is Lex?
The Latin word ‘lex’ derives from the Latin root verb, ligare, ‘to bind.’ It was translated to mean ‘law.’
Its use, came from mobilising armies, and from organising of military campaigns. Nowadays Lex refers to rules, or laws, issued by the highest political authorities.
What is Ius?
The word ‘law’ was also used to translate the Latin word ‘Ius’. ‘Ius,’ (‘iurare’, to swear), refers to a bond or obligation. Usually one that arises out of a personal commitment made in a solemn speech. More generally, Ius denotes an order of human affairs, stemming from mutual commitment. Ius can also mean a natural, or customary right. Latin for ‘natural law’ is ‘ius naturale’, the genitive form of which is ‘iuris naturalis’. Thus an Ius can exist without it being codified, thereby making it independent of written law. Does customary right, and mutual commitment outside of written law, sound like an organic, or natural law?
Ius versus Lex
If so, then Lex and Ius are very different, if not opposed to each other. So the word ‘Naturale’ or ‘Naturalis’ became appended to the word ‘Ius,’ (law). The result is ‘Ius naturale,’ or in our language, ‘natural law.’
Lex is man-made law. It offered nothing from nature or what is natural. So Lex adopted a suffix to offset that deficiency, supposedly to grant moral standing. Thus it became ‘Lex Naturale,’ or ‘Lex Naturalis.’
Both ‘Ius naturale’ and ‘Lex naturale’ now refer to natural law. There lies the lie. Lex Naturale assumes authority as though natural rights morally approve. Yet Ius has nothing to do with exercising political authority. Ius stems from mutual commitment, not authoritarian rule. ‘Rule’ remains attached to its Lex origin, however. Add ‘naturale,’ and rule is deemed moral by nature. By this devious means, Lex as ‘positive law,’ today grants itself the right to overrule Ius naturale, or natural law. Creator’s laws are wide open to countermand by Man’s inventions. This is todays condition, the reason natural law is refused.
Plainly obvious, natural law will never spin money the way millions of invented laws can. So who wins?
“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes it’s laws” — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild.
Is law to be made, as that statement claims? Or is law natural, endowed by Creator? There’ll be much more about natural law in later posts.