There is a parallel with the CTMU in writings of Abdu'l-Baha regarding "theories of composition", while their philosophies may differ in degree of specificity, there is at least a clear precedent for Langan's recognition of a "3-way distinction" and the role of teleological or divine volition in the natural world.
"The materialists state that inasmuch as it is proved by science that the life of phenomena depends upon composition and its destruction upon disintegration, they question the necessity of a creator, the self-subsistent Lord. "For," argue the materialists, "we see with our own eyes that these infinite beings go through myriads of forms of composition and in every combination they bring about certain distinctive characteristics, so we are independent of any divine maker."
Those informed with divine philosophy answer that there are three theories of composition:
first, accidental composition;
second, involuntary composition;
third, voluntary composition.
If we declare that construction is accidental, this is logically a false theory, because then we have to believe in an effect without a cause; our reason refuses to think of an effect without a primal cause.
The second, involuntary composition, means that each element has within it an innate function of this power of composition — certain elements have flowed toward each other, their union being an inherent necessity of their being. But as long as we reason that it is the inherent necessity of those elements to enter into composition there should not be any necessity for decomposition; and inasmuch as we observe that there is a process of decomposition, we conclude that the constituent elements of life enter neither involuntarily nor accidentally, but voluntarily into composition — and this means that the infinite forms of organisms are composed through the superior will, the eternal will, the will of the living and self-subsistent Lord." 
"597. This is the argument of the materialists. On the other hand those who are informed of divine philosophy answer in the following terms:
Composition is of three kinds.
1. Accidental composition. 2. Involuntary composition. 3. Voluntary composition.
There is no fourth kind of composition. Composition is restricted to these three categories.
If we say that composition is accidental, this is philosophically a false theory, because then we have to believe in an effect without a cause, and philosophically, no effect is conceivable without a cause. We cannot think of an effect without some primal cause, and composition being an effect, there must naturally be a cause behind it.", 
"In the foregoing, there has been much talk of the causality relationship and the fundamental role it plays in the whole process of moral and spiritual development. We need now to take a closer look at some of the general logical properties of this relationship, as well as the logical connections between causality and a few other fundamental relations. Our purpose in undertaking this study is to establish the existence of God on a totally objective basis, as a necessary logical feature of the overall structure of reality itself.
By the term reality we mean the totality of existence, everything there is. A phenomenon is some portion of reality, and causality is a relationship between two phenomena A and B, which holds whenever A is a cause of B (symbolized A → B). This means that A contains a sufficient reason for the existence of B. More generally, everything B that exists must either be preceded by a cause A different from B (A → B and A ≠ B), or else contain within itself a sufficient reason for its existence (B → B). In the former case, we say that B is caused or other-caused and in the latter uncaused or self-caused. The principle that every existing phenomenon must either be caused or uncaused (and not both) is the principle of sufficient reason." http://www.onecountry.org/e102/e10214xs.htm