The Catholic Lawyer

Volume 13 Number 2 Volume 13, Spring 1967, Number 2 Article 5

The Relevance of St.

Richard A. Vachon, S.J.

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/tcl

Part of the Catholic Studies Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Catholic Lawyer by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE RELEVANCE OF ST. THOMAS MORE

RICHARD A. VACHON, S.J.*

T HOMAS MORE WAS the contemporary man. I mean this not in the sense Winston Churchill had in mind when he wrote, "More stood forth as the defender of all that was finest in the medieval outlook." Rather, Thomas More was our man. He worked for a salary and met a payroll. Long before urban sprawl, More was a city man-Reynolds calls him the greatest of all Londoners. He was born in the city and lived in the heart of it for nearly 50 years. Then he became a suburbanite-opening up Chelsea. He invested in land, leasing farmland to tenant-farmers or holding it on speculation. He was a politician, probably the only canonized saint who ever ran for public office and won. And when Parliament elected him Speaker, he petitioned and received from the King immunity for the members of the House to express their opinions freely on the matters submitted to them. He was legal counsel for the Mercers' Company, those early inter- national traders. He was an educator who believed deeply in the lasting rewards of the mind-and who filled his home with students, boys and girls. Or, at least he would have filled it with students had the house not already been so full of friends and servants. When one is tempted to think of Dame Alice More as that "hooked nose harpy" as one ungracious fellow seems to have written to Erasmus about her, remember that she ran a home which at times had as many as 150 people in it. Such a job can ruffle anyone.

*A.B. 1943, A.M. 1944, Gonzaga Univ.; S.T.L. 1951, Alma College; LL.B. 1956, Univ. of San Francisco; LL.M. 1959, S.J.D. 1962, Columbia Univ.; Professor of Law, Loyola Univ., Los Angeles. 13 CATHOLIC LAWYER, SPRING 1967

Thomas More was a very busy man, they say in the Constitution of the Church and, as remarks, "an almost in the Modern World that the true indecently successful one." There is a Christian by his very faith is obliged more letter in the preface to Utopia which says than ever to measure up to his earthly what most of you have said about your duties, because there is no true opposition own schedules: between professional and religious life. While I am constantly engaged in legal In a lecture delivered 30 years ago, business, either pleading or hearing, or Professor Chambers compared More's giving an award in arbitration, or relation toward Henry on the King's deciding a matter as judge; while I am paying a friendly visit to one man or Matter to Antigone's burial of her brother going on business to another; while I de- contrary to Creon's orders. Certainly vote almost the whole day to other men's More agreed with the theory of Antigone's affairs, and what remains of it to my act. In the great dialogue letter written family at home, I leave to myself, that by to Alice Alington, she is to writing, nothing at all. For when I have returned home, I must converse quotes her father to say: with my wife, chat with my children, and As for the law of the land, though talk to my servants. All this I count as every man being born and inhabiting business, for it has got to be done-and therein, is bounden to the keeping in it is quite necessary unless you want to every case upon some temporal pain, and be a stranger in your own home ... in many cases upon pain of God's dis- In these occupations . . . the day, the pleasure too, yet no man is bound to month, the year slip away. When then swear that every law is well made nor can we find time to write? . . . I only bound upon God's displeasure to perform get for myself the time I can filch from any such point of the law as is in deed sleep or food. unlawful.

When you advert to More's reputation The question remains whether More acted as a writer, whose published works run as Antigone did. And since this looks to well over a million and a half words, at first blush strikingly like a modern who knew what a deadline was-writing American phenomenon, I would like to his answers to Tyndale in the dead of dwell on it further. night against time and the devil-you Revolutions generally occur only when know More was a modem man. progress does not keep pace with the In a world in turmoil, he was at the hopes and expectations of the people. center of the storm. Before Luther's We live in a time of great hopes and name was known, More was urging inter- great expectations. All over the world nal reform in the Church and pointing out men are wakening to the value of their its weaknesses and abuses. It was only humanity. This occurred also in More's when the appeals for reform turned to time with the spread of Humanism, which protest and then to schism or revolt that was helped by Saint Thomas' own work. More chose unity. And when Henry VIII succeeded his It is almost as if the Fathers of Vatican father in 1509 his accomplishments, phy- II were writing with More in mind when sical, social, intellectual, seemed to ST. THOMAS MORE promise a golden age. Just as in our Obviously More did not engage in any- country, in our time, this is not a revolu- thing remotely like indirect civil dis- tionary period-at least not yet, neither obedience. But what of the other, direct was 's even in 1535. Revolution disobedience? Certainly what he did or is war against illegitimate government-a did not do was non-violent. And we concept radically distinct from that of civil all know the nobility of his purpose- disobedience, which is but one of many simply to save his soul. responses of the citizen towards legitimate In the sense that everyone knew of his government. position, it was certainly public knowl- At no time did More consider Henry edge. But was it public in the deeper anything other than his gracious and sense of appealing for public consensus legitimate sovereign. This is clear from and action? He wrote Meg in April, his letters written from Chelsea on March 1534, from the Tower: 5, 1534, to Henry and to Cromwell, and My purpose was not to put any fault from his many letters written during his either in the Act [of Succession] or any imprisonment to his daughter Meg where man that made it, or in the oath, or any he calls himself the King's true faithful man that swear it, nor to condemn the subject and daily bedesman who prays conscience of any other man. . . . As for myself . . . though I would not for His Highness and all the realm. "I deny to swear to the succession, yet unto the do nobody harm, I say none harm, I oath that was offered me I could not think none harm." swear without the jeopardizing of my More did not think himself a revolu- soul to perpetual damnation. tionary and would have been angered These are not the words of a man at the thought. So, to legitimize his trying to start a public movement. And acts by too easy comparisons, such as they are repeated again and again, to George III and the Boston Tea Party, especially in a remarkable note to a fel- is wide of the mark. low prisoner, Dr. Nicholas Wilson: Can More be called a civil disobedient Our Lord be your comfort and where in any true sense? For the sake of as I perceive . . . that you have promised brevity-if not agreement-let us accept to swear the oath, I beseech our Lord a definition proposed a number of months to give you thereof good luck. I never ago. Civil disobedience is an illegal, gave any man counsel to the contrary public, non-violent protest against some in my days nor never used any ways to put any scruple in other folk's conscience governmental activity and done for a concerning the matter. And where as I moral purpose. It takes two general perceive that you would gladly know forms: direct, in which the law objected what I intend to do, you know well that to is the only law disobeyed; indirect, in I told you when we were both abroad which trespass laws, fire laws and other that I would therein neither know your such needed and obviously just laws are mind nor no man else's, nor you nor no man else should therein know mine, for disobeyed to call public attention to the I would be no partaker with no man nor, alleged injustice of some other govern- of truth, never will I - but leaving mental act. every other man to their own conscience, 13 CATHOLIC LAWYER, SPRING 1967

my self will with good grace follow matter for which he would die; and die mine. for a reason not understandable to most Englishmen of his time-or since-and This scarcely sounds like a man bent on absurd to his many friends and to his direct action-or any other action for that family. And the final loneliness was that matter. he died with no hope of having his With every power at his disposal, More example bear fruit. wished to show that he had violated no We can hope that the destruction of law. It was only at the end when death such a man could not happen here. We was certain that he revealed his true live at a time which would be scandalized stand: "Since I am destined to die, . * * by the rules of his trial. No presumption the matter demands that before I depart of innocence; no help in proving inno- I declare unequivocally what I think cence; no reading of the indictment before about the decree of Parliament." He trial; no opportunity to offer evidence, did not wish that anyone should think call witnesses, cross-examine witnesses. that in remaining silent during those long And no assistance of counsel. months, that he was consenting to his A long way we have come. In some accusers' madness. Finally he says: vague sense we know that democracy is I would be greatly perturbed were I open public debate to achieve a working condemned to die because of some per- sonal crime, because of some treasonable consensus. We have erected structures act against the King. . . . I die now to protect and foster that debate. Our defending piety and religion and the doc- procedures, we would claim, are less trine of the Catholic Church. barbaric. But men are men and easily the moving mood of the Real civil disobedience cannot succeed influenced by has said that Thomas in a reign of terror. It is simply de- times. Chesterton More died for defying the heresy of stroyed. And Thomas Cromwell's Eng- absolute monarchy and the Divine Right land was a reign of terror. I do not of Kings. I do not believe this because think that More was a precursor of latter- More believed in the Divine Right of day political actionists in any real sense, Kings. Nor was his death a protest save possibly one. against change-for he was all for change. Belloc has said that More's great glory His was the probing, free mind which was his free and lonely dedication to one is strong and calm when the world goes small strict point of abstract truth. Long mad. practice in seeing both sides of any ques- This can happen again, as many times tion made him a sort of skeptic. As any it has since 1535. The entire nobility lawyer, he knew that most human prob- and all bishops in England save John lems have more than two honest answers. More's dear friends-had He lived in the world of the relative- Fisher-all the harsh, practical matters of govern- thought it only common sense to swear mental affairs-yet he devoted seven the oath. Faced with this more deceptive years to study this one small absolute (Continued on page 170) 13 CATHOLIC LAWYER, SPRING 1967

before the public eye would be subject As noted, many questions concerning to even a greater privilege, perhaps even defamation and privacy actions remain an absolute one, protecting statements unanswered. Answers will come; Time, about him which might otherwise violate Inc. v. Hill is but one of the building his right of privacy. Thus, even on a blocks as the Supreme Court measures the showing of actual malice, no redress would communication torts by the guarantees of be afforded a public official in a right of the first amendment. privacy action.

DEFINING OBSCENITY

(Continued) be debated. Presently, the Wisconsin accordance with the United States Statutes uses "lewd, obscene and in- Supreme Court's view of a constitutional decent" without defining them, leaving the definition. definition to the courts. By its decision The prevailing view of the United in State v. Chobot, 12 Wis. 2d 110 States Supreme Court is based on the (1960) and McCauley v. Tropic of Can- Roth decision. The present majority cer, 20 Wis. 2d 132 (1963), the Wis- interpretation is that the Roth standard consin Supreme Court has defined the includes 3 specifications: 1) the dom- statutory term "obscenity" as equivalent inant theme on the whole appeals to the to the Roth definition and has required prurient interest, 2) it is patently offen- the Roth standard for judging materials sive to present community standards, and obscene. Thus, obscenity is defined in 3) it contains no redeeming social value.

ST. THOMAS MORE

(Continued) tyranny, More said: "You must pardon all good company." me from passing as you pass, but if I In the final analysis, More is the con- thought in the matter as you do, I dare temporary man because he is the type of not in such a matter pass for good com- man we need. A man willing to make pany. For the passage of my soul passes his own frightening judgments. A man.