Natural Law...OR...New Covenant in Rom. 2:14-15 - What "Law" is written on the heart?

This is somewhat of a Part 2 to my previous post, "Imputed Righteousness in the New Covenant?"

For this post I want to share a fascinating find regarding a fascinating text of Scripture that is often glossed over when reading Romans 2. Embedded within the context of Paul's claim that "the doers of the law will be justified" (2:13) is a curious statement that the Gentiles "who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires" (2:14) and so reveal that "the law is written on their hearts" (2:15). This text can play a key role in Protestant-Catholic discussions because the way it uses the term "law," which is a crucial term to understand when reading Paul. It is my contention, as well as that of a growing number of Protestant scholars, that the term "law" (Greek: nomos) specifically refers to the Mosaic Law, and not to some more generic eternal law of God. Recognizing the serious negative implications of this for Sola Fide, some Protestants are fond of turning to Romans 2:14-15, thinking that this text provides an escape. In this post I will show that this text doesn't help this Protestant objection at all, and in fact opens an avenue to prove the Catholic position. 

The Protestant claim is essentially this: The "law" which the Gentiles lack is obviously the Mosaic Law, and yet Paul says this "law" is written on the heart of the Gentiles. The only way this makes sense is if the "law" in question is simply the moral law which all men are under and which only happened to be written down in the Mosaic Law. These Protestants say this explains why all men have a conscience and are without excuse before God, because even though they do know better, they end up sinning anyway. If this Protestant argument is valid, then this could mean that when Paul says we are justified by faith "apart from the Law" he is basically saying we are justified "apart from the moral law," which these Protestants would then say boils down to justification apart from any works under any conditions, leaving faith alone as that which justifies.

This Protestant claim fails for two reasons. First, while it's agreed that the "Law" mentioned here is the Mosaic Law, it's also true that Paul focuses strictly on the Mosaic Law in his discussions throughout and he never transitions into critiquing a more generic law. So even if it is said Romans 2:14-15 refers to a generic law (something akin to Natural Law) written on the hearts of the Gentiles, this doesn't automatically mean we are free to project this onto other texts, especially in Romans 3-4 and Galatians 2-3. In fact, when Paul mentions "works of the Law," he certainly includes in this circumcision, dietary laws, and holidays, along with moral commands of the Torah. So it's wrong to reduce Paul's "works of the Law" comments to merely the moral law when he plainly includes "ceremonial" works along with moral commands. (Many Protestants erroneously believe that "works of the Law" can only refer to one of two things, the moral commandments or the ceremonial commandments, rather than both, which is what I believe Paul refers to.) But I think there's an even stronger case to be made.

Second, while there are some in Catholic Church history who have interpreted Romans 2:14-15 to refer to Natural Law, and while this remains a fairly popular reading by many today, there is a more elegant and satisfying interpretation of this text that takes things to a whole new level. At one point in his journey of faith, St Augustine did believe in the Natural Law reading of this verse, but as he came to a deeper appreciation for Paul later on, he made an amazing insight on this passage.

In one of the most important writings of the Early Church, On the Spirit and the Letter, St Augustine address this verse in Sections 43-47 of his treatise. To keep this post brief, I'll only quote the most pertinent passages all contained in Section 46:

If therefore the apostle, when he mentioned [in Rom 2:14-15] that the Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the law, and have the work of the law written in their hearts, intended those to be understood who believed in Christ,—who do not come to the faith like the Jews, through a precedent law,—there is no good reason why we should endeavor to distinguish them from those to whom the Lord by the prophet promises the new covenant, telling them that He will write His laws in their hearts [Jer 31:31-34; cf Eze 36:23-29] . . . There is therefore a good agreement of this passage of the apostle with the words of the prophet so that belonging to the new testament means having the law of God not written on tables, but on the heart,—that is, embracing the righteousness of the law with innermost affection, where faith works by love [Gal 5:6]. Because it is by faith that God justifies the Gentiles . . . and believing Gentiles might be made children of Abraham, “in Abraham’s seed, which is Christ,” [Gal 3:16], by following the faith of him who, without receiving the law written on tables, and not yet possessing even circumcision, “believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness.” [Gen 15:6]. Now what the apostle attributed to Gentiles of this character, it must be some such thing as what he says to the Corinthians: “not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.” [2 Cor 3:3]. For thus do they become of the house of Israel, when their uncircumcision is accounted circumcision, by the fact that they do not exhibit the righteousness of the law by the excision of the flesh, but keep it by the charity of the heart. . . . they are partakers of the new testament, since God puts His laws into their mind, and writes them in their hearts with his own finger, the Holy Ghost, by whom is shed abroad in them the love [Rom 5:5] which is the” fulfilling of the law.” [Rom 13:8-13; cf Gal 5:14]

So Augustine's interpretation was that the Gentiles of Romans 2:14-15 were none other than Christian Believers, coming directly from paganism rather than from the advantage of the Mosaic Law as the Jews did. He proves this by using the principle of "Scripture interprets Scripture," which looks at the other texts that speak of "writing the law on their hearts" to see if they can shed more light on the matter.

His first text is the text I looked at in my last post, Jeremiah 31:31-34 (cf Eze 36:23-39), where God says He is making a New Covenant in which having "the law written on the heart" is a distinguishing feature. This is further confirmed from the New Testament where Paul says very plainly that Christians have the "law written on their heart" in 2 Corinthians 3 and Hebrews 8:10. Not to be overlooked is the detail that this involves not only receiving the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but receiving this "new heart" also signifies receiving the infusion of Agape Love (i.e. supernatural love, sometimes called "Charity"). And St Augustine interprets Paul as saying it is by this reception of the Holy Spirit and Charity that a Christian "fulfills the law." This fits right along with the claim of Paul in Romans 2:29 when Paul speaks of circumcision of the heart by the Holy Spirit as well as speaking of the 'uncircumcised' who keep the law (Rom 2:27-28).

And to add to this, it is this framework which Augustine says we are to interpret Abraham "believing in God and he counted it as righteousness" of Genesis 15:6 fame. So Abraham was the epitome of Romans 2:14-15, or at least pointed towards its fulfillment in the fullness of time at Pentecost.

This takes us immediately to the "controversial" text of Romans 2:12, where Paul says the "doers of the Law will be justified," Paul is thus clearly speaking of Christians enabled to do the law in the fulfilled sense just mentioned (i.e. through the infusion of Love and the Holy Spirit). No need for the typical Protestant excuse that Paul was speaking hypothetically here or in some sense didn't really mean to imply Christians could do this.

I recall now that Dr Bryan Cross has written about this in a fantastic post, where he points out that the Protestant mentality of 'keeping the law' is that of completing a check-list of good works, wherein you must complete all works without fail to be righteous, but Paul's Catholic understanding of 'keeping the law' is more about a state of being, fulfilling the law at all moments in virtue of the fact you live and act with and by the supernatural presence of the indwelling of the Trinity and grace.


This New Covenant interpretation of Romans 2:14-15 has several advantages over the Natural Law interpretation, including making the message and context more coherent, connecting nicely with the New Covenant prophecies and Biblical references to the Holy Spirit writing upon the heart, and ultimately giving Paul a lot more depth. Going by the Natural Law reading, it gives the impression that unbelievers are capable of fulfilling the law and doing all these good works, which really is a very dubious conclusion to come to. It would be ridiculous for Paul to go on and on about us needing forgiveness and living by the Spirit and then turn around and give unbelievers a sort of easy pass with lower expectations.


Finally, I want to briefly discuss the part of 2:14-15 where it says the Gentiles do this "by nature," since this could suggest Natural Law. In Section 48, Augustine says this isn't an issue at all:

Nor ought it to disturb us that the apostle described them as doing that which is contained in the law “by nature,” - not by the Spirit of God, not by faith, not by grace. For it is the Spirit of grace that does it, in order to restore in us the image of God, in which we were naturally created. [Gen 1:27] Sin, indeed, is contrary to nature, and it is grace that heals it, . . . In consequence of this sinfulness, the law of God is erased out of their hearts; and therefore, when, the sin being healed, it is written there, the prescriptions of the law are done “by nature,” - not that by nature grace is denied, but rather by grace nature is repaired

In short, this "by nature" refers to man's natural condition, when Adam and Eve had the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and infused Love. Sin caused this to be removed, which is why Catholics say through original sin Adam lost for all of us the supernatural gifts, notably sanctifying grace - without destroying humanity itself. Again, this reading is far superior to the Natural Law interpretation, for that interpretation would suggest it is within the unbeliever's "natural" abilities to keep the Law, which as I noted is a dubious subject.

So with these two posts, I feel I have laid down another firm foundation by which the Catholic Church is once again vindicated while the Protestant understanding of Justification loses even more credibility, particularly by not having a decent explanation for these texts.