토마스 아퀴나스의 자연법과 정의 사상 - 그의 법사상의 신학적·철학적 기초와 관련하여 -
The Thomas Aquinas’ Thought of Natural Law and justice - Theological and philosophical basics of the his thought of law -
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
If it is the Godfathers who prepared the ground for the christian natural law, it is Thomas Aquinas who closely stipulated the natural law the most in the light of the reality of medieval times. He is not only a theologian but also a philosopher who compiled medieval philosophy. In other words, he complemented “christian philosophy” which was settled into shape by Augustinus, and complied it. Theological and philosophical basics of the principle of Thomas law is based not only on the Ten Commandments and the Law of Moses, especially about the trial in the Book of Deuteronomy, but also on medieval scholasticism founded on the Aristotelian philosophy and Stoicism of Rome, particularly Cicero’s principle of natural law. Thomas’ theological thought is predicated on intellectualism. The natural law is generally an order in accordance with reason. Influenced by Stoicism, he claims that rationality is the sovereign principle of human beings. A man is a rational animal moving toward one’s purpose with free will (conscience and responsibility). Political tendencies of unification and peace is inevitable for humans. He divides the law into eternal law (Lex aerena), natural law (Lex naturale), a man-made law (Lex humana), divine law (Lex divina), and passional law (Lex fomes). By faith, eternal law can be accepted as the guidance ideology of God’s action, which demonstrates God’s plan, and natural law can be found through natural judgements led solely by reason with the help of eternal law saying that a man is a rational creation of God. Also, a man-made law is the positive law enacted by human reason in order to sustain a social order in real life. Believing in that God is present in the world, the Stoic school identifies divine law with natural law. However, the distinct characteristic of Thomas’ natural law is that he separates divine law as a law for afterlife from natural law as a law for this world. More over, he doesn't argue that the contents of this life is transferred into the next world through harmonious stages. As natural law is mentioned in rationality of the nature, eternal law can be named by such involvement. Thomas contends that any authoritarian state should have an ideal for justice via relative natural law in order to adhere to its own order and peace. This ideal is realized at last when justice properly exchange and distribute everything given. Thomas’ concept of justice is not connected with the strong rejection toward the course of justice, which is abused by authorities and used in distorted ways. In actual practice, demands for justice is just understood as a virtue that should be practiced by a complete object, a nation. In conclusion, although Aquinas more strongly emphasizes pathos in justice than Stoics seeking natural law, he fails to stimulate interest in sharply contrasting the true meaning of law with the positive law. In this way, there is a difference with the modern theory of natural law.
Abstract
If it is the Godfathers who prepared the ground for the christian natural law, it is Thomas Aquinas who closely stipulated the natural law the most in the light of the reality of medieval times. He is not only a theologian but also a philosopher who compiled medieval philosophy. In other words, he complemented “christian philosophy” which was settled into shape by Augustinus, and complied it. Theological and philosophical basics of the principle of Thomas law is based not only on the Ten Commandments and the Law of Moses, especially about the trial in the Book of Deuteronomy, but also on medieval scholasticism founded on the Aristotelian philosophy and Stoicism of Rome, particularly Cicero’s principle of natural law. Thomas’ theological thought is predicated on intellectualism. The natural law is generally an order in accordance with reason. Influenced by Stoicism, he claims that rationality is the sovereign principle of human beings. A man is a rational animal moving toward one’s purpose with free will (conscience and responsibility). Political tendencies of unification and peace is inevitable for humans. He divides the law into eternal law (Lex aerena), natural law (Lex naturale), a man-made law (Lex humana), divine law (Lex divina), and passional law (Lex fomes). By faith, eternal law can be accepted as the guidance ideology of God’s action, which demonstrates God’s plan, and natural law can be found through natural judgements led solely by reason with the help of eternal law saying that a man is a rational creation of God. Also, a man-made law is the positive law enacted by human reason in order to sustain a social order in real life. Believing in that God is present in the world, the Stoic school identifies divine law with natural law. However, the distinct characteristic of Thomas’ natural law is that he separates divine law as a law for afterlife from natural law as a law for this world. More over, he doesn't argue that the contents of this life is transferred into the next world through harmonious stages. As natural law is mentioned in rationality of the nature, eternal law can be named by such involvement. Thomas contends that any authoritarian state should have an ideal for justice via relative natural law in order to adhere to its own order and peace. This ideal is realized at last when justice properly exchange and distribute everything given. Thomas’ concept of justice is not connected with the strong rejection toward the course of justice, which is abused by authorities and used in distorted ways. In actual practice, demands for justice is just understood as a virtue that should be practiced by a complete object, a nation. In conclusion, although Aquinas more strongly emphasizes pathos in justice than Stoics seeking natural law, he fails to stimulate interest in sharply contrasting the true meaning of law with the positive law. In this way, there is a difference with the modern theory of natural law.
참고문헌 (28)
- 김영진, "율법과 법전" (2005), 한들출판사
- 김영훈, "기독교와 자연법사상", 기독교문화, 6 (1987), 숭실대학교 한국기독교문화연구소
- 김철영, "칼빈의 율법관에 드러난 자연법의 이해", 장신논단, 15 (1999)
- 김철영, "기독교 관점에서 본 정의와 공동체 생활" (2000), 장로회신학대학교출판부
- 노희원, "최근의 십계명 연구" (1995), 도서출판 은성
- 데이비드 C. 스텐메츠, "종교개혁과 십계명", 기독교사상, 33(10) (1989)
- J. I. Packer․, "율법과 윤리" (1985), 백합출판사
- 손은실, "토마스 아퀴나스에 있어서 하나님의 의(Institia Dei)이해 : 『신학 대전』제1부 문제21 과 『로마서 주석』 중 1, 17과 3, 21-26 주석을 중심으로", 석사, 역사신학, pp.2001
- 신치재, "기독교적 법체계에서 성서의 율법체계와 가치", 중앙법학, 16(1), pp.223~250 (2014), 중앙법학회
- 안철훈, "히브리민족에게 수여된 십계명의 헌법적 기능 : 출애굽기 20장을 중심으로 한 십계명의 헌법기능", 석사, 목회학, pp.2008
- 양혜윤, "정의와 재판 : 고대 근동 법전과 구약법전을 중심으로", 석사, 신학, pp.2010
- 에른스트 블로흐, "자연법과 인간의 존엄성" (2011), 열린책들
- 우병훈, "헤시오도스의 디케(IKH) 개념과 고대 근동의 정의 개념 비교 연구", 서양고전학연구, (24), pp.1~28 (2005), 한국서양고전학회
- 유병화, "법철학" (1998), 박영사
- 이나가키 료스케, "토마스 아퀴나스 신학대전 새로 읽기" (2011), 가톨릭출판사
- 이정일, "토마스 아퀴나스와 헤겔의 자연법 비교", 범한철학, (29), pp.89~130 (2003), 범한철학회
- 이종근, "히브리 법사상" (2004), 삼육대학교출판부
- 이태재, "법철학사와 자연법론" (1984), 법문사
- 임태수, "신명기에 나타난 복음과 율법", 신학사상, (124), pp.87~106 (2004), 한국신학연구소
- 자끄 엘롤, "법의 신학적 기초" (1985), 현대사상사
- 조병화, "법철학" (1984), 박영사
- 최태영, "법철학-서양법철학의 역사적 배경", ~
- 토마스 아퀴나스, "신학대전" (1989), 성바오로출판사
- "성서백과 대사전 11", 성서교재간행사
- K. Barth, "Theologische Existenz Heute, Heft 32" (1935), Chr.Raifer Verlag
- Frank. Cruesemann, "The Torah :Theology And Social History of Old Testament Law" (1996), Fortress Press
- G. Radbruch, "현대법철학의 근본문제", pp.219~, 박영문고
- Johannes Neumann, "Bedeutung und Begrenzung des Rechts bei Thomas Aquin, Zs. f. evangel. Kirchenrecht, Bd. 23" (1978)
