{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02436738519212746, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.209302325581396, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Augustine and Natural Law: Negotiating the Saeculum with Markus, Milbank, and Mathewes

ABSTRACT Contemporary Augustinian political theology has encompassed numerous interpretations of Augustine's understanding of the two cities, but a common feature of many is a denial of the presence of natural law in the bishop's thought. This paper surveys three major interpreters of Augustine – Robert Markus, John Milbank, and Charles Mathewes – and their conceptions of the secular and its relation to natural law. It argues first that, despite major divergences, they share a common distrust of natural law. Second, drawing on Vincent Lloyd's distinction of natural law as process versus product, I suggest a picture of what a uniquely Augustinian account of natural law might entail, grounded in a semiotic theory of creation, a distinction between orders of nature and wills, and a view of the use-enjoyment paradigm. An Augustinian natural law, then, is not only warranted but also may be a useful means of rapprochement between Augustinians and natural law theologians.