John T. Noonan, Jr., on the Catholic Conscience and War: Negre V
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Notre Dame Law Review Volume 76 Article 5 Issue 3 Propter Honoris Respectum 4-1-2001 John T. Noonan, Jr., on the Catholic Conscience and War: Negre v. Larsen Charles J. Reid Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Recommended Citation Charles J. Reid, John T. Noonan, Jr., on the Catholic Conscience and War: Negre v. Larsen, 76 Notre Dame L. Rev. 881 (2001). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol76/iss3/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. JOHN T. NOONAN, JR., ON THE CATHOLIC CONSCIENCE AND WAR: NEGRE V. LARSEN CharlesJ. Reid, Jr.--- INTRODUCTION In his landmark work, TIze Lustre of Our Countyy, and in his casebook, The Believer and thw Powers that Are,2 Judge John T. Noonan, Jr., examines the historical development of the relationship between the religious conscience and state power.3 Noonan makes clear that at the heart ofJames Madison's belief in religious liberty is the princi- ple that the obligations of faith must have priority over the demands of the state.4 In this regard, Madison is taken as a linear descendant of St. Peter, who responded to the Sanhedrin when he was forbidden to teach in Christ's name, "We must obey God rather than man."5 The demands of the state on conscience are rarely greater than in time of war, when the vital interests of the civil community, indeed, even its survival, may be threatened by external foes. Hans Morgen- thau has referred to "the nation as the supreme authority... within a certain territory,"6 and to those who see no higher good than the corn- * BA. 1978, University of Wisconsin-Miliaukee; J.D. 1982, J.C.L 1985, ie Catholic University of America; Ph.D. 1995, Comell University. Dr. CharlesJ. Reid, Jr., is Research Associate in Law and History at Emory University School of Law. He would like to thank Richard Harrington, Stuart Land, tie Honorable John T. Noonan, Jr., and Thomas L Shaffer for responding to inquiries regarding aspects of Negre v.Larsen. He would also like to thank Kathleen Brady and John Witte, Jr., for stimulating conversations about this Article. Generous thanks must also go to Will Haines and Pam Deemer of Emory Law School Library for their invaluable skills. The Author naturally assumes responsibility for any errors. 1 JOHN T. NOONAN, JR., THE LusTRE OF OUR COUNTRY- TiE AMIFAQN EXPERI- EN E OF REUIGIOUS FREoiOi (1998). 2 JOHN T. NOONAN, JR., THE BELIEVER AND THE PoWERs THLT ARt GSES, Hisronv AND OTHER DATA BEaRN'G ON THE RELATION OF RELIGION ,ND GoVERNMENr (1987). 3 See CharlesJ. Reid,Jr., The FundarmentalFredo.in:JudgeJohn T. NoonanJr. 's Histo- riography of Religious Liberty, 83 MARQ. L. RE" 367 (1999). 4 See NOONAN, supra note 1, at 61-91. 5 Acts 5:29. 6 HANS J. MORGENTHAU, PoLncs AMoNG NxioNs: THE STRUGGLE FOR POWE.R AND PEACE 318 (5th ed. 1978). NOTRE DAME LAW REVIEW [VOL- 76: , munity's own interests, it is assumed that the state has the final author- ity to call upon its citizenry to assist in the national defense. 7 The religious believer, however, by virtue of the relationship he has with the Divine, must respond to a different set of authorities when decid- ing whether to take up arms. Catholic just-war theory, throughout its long history, has required believers conscientiously to scrutinize the morality of state decisions in favor of war and to refrain from participating in conflicts that are un- just either as to ends or means.8 The American Catholic Bishops have taught that "[t] he Christian has no choice but to defend peace, prop- erly understood, against aggression. This is an inalienable obliga- tion."9 But they have also "affirm[ed] the Catholic teaching that the state's decision to use force should always be morally scrutinized by the citizens asked to support the decision or to participate in war."", This responsibility is particularly acute in representative democracies, in which the citizenry as a whole is obligated to be well-informed on matters of war and peace and should properly share in the guilt should they allow the governors to transgress moral norms.11 The Vietnam War era case of Negre v. Larsen12 presents in particu- larly vivid fashion the clash between the military demands of a state at 7 This is the significance of Oliver Wendell Holmes's analogy to military service in his decision upholding forced sterilizations. "We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives." Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200, 207 (1927). 8 John P. Langan, The Good of Selective Conscientious Objection, in SELEG'IIVE CON, SCIENTIOUS OBJECrION: ACcOMMODATING CONSCIENCE AND SECURITY 89, 98 (Michael F. Noone, Jr. ed., 1989). The possibility of selective conscientious objection is built into the structure ofjust-ivar theory at least in the sense that it alvays contains the possibility of judging that a particular war is not morallyjustifiable because it fails to meet one or more of the norms laid down in the theory and that therefore an individual applying the theory will judge that it is not morally right for him or her to participate in the war, at least as a combatant. Id. 9 Nat'l Conference of Catholic Bishops, The Challenge of Peace: God's Promise and Our Response, in 4 PAsToRAL LETTERS OF THE UNITED STATES CATHOLIC BisioPs 493, 512 (HughJ. Nolan ed., 1984). The bishops include pacifism, properly understood, as a legitimate means of defending against aggression. Id. at 512-13. 10 Admin. Bd., U.S. Catholic Conference, Statement on Registration and Conscription for Military Service, in 4 PAsTORAL LETTERS OF THE UNITED STATEs GT-OLIC Bistioi's, supra note 9, at 360, 361. 11 See MICHAEL WALZER, JUST AND UNJUST W3ARs: A MoRAL ARGUMENT WIT His. TORICAL ILLUSTRATIONS 296-300 (1977); Frederick H. Russell, The HistoricalPerspective of the Bishops' PastoralLetter: The Viev of One Medievalist, in PEACE IN A NucmxR AGE: THE BISHOPS' PASToRAL LETEIR IN PERSPECIVE 86, 96 (CharlesJ. Reid,Jr., ed., 1986). 12 401 U.S. 437 (1971). 2001] CATHOLIC CONSCIENCE AND WAR: NEGRE V. LARSEN 883 war and the scruples of a Catholic conscientious objector. Louis Negre, the petitioner, took his case ultimately to the United States Supreme Court, where he was represented, in part, byJohn Noonan, who authored a brief articulating the demands made by Catholicjust- war thought on the individual conscience.13 Not only states but also individual believers are bound by the requirement to scrutinize the morality of armed conflict, Noonan argued, and to object when the cause is seen to be unjust.14 This obligation of conscience, Noonan concluded, should accordingly be recognized as part of the American doctrine of religious liberty. 15 This Article examines Judge Noonan's contribution to the late 1960s/early 1970s debate over the claim made by many Catholics of a right to object selectively to service in the Vietnam War on just-war grounds. The shape and substance of the Article draw inspiration from the methodology pioneered by Judge Noonan in his own path- breaking works of legal history. That methodology, which combines an intense interest in contextuality and contingency ith a panoramic understanding of the way in which a given case or incident fits within a larger moral or legal tradition, informs in particularJudge Noonan's later historical works, especially Powerto Dissolve,16 Personsand Masks of the Law,a7 The Antelope,'8 Bribes,'9 and Lustre of Our Couniy.v- In these works and others, Judge Noonan has sought to understand not only the development of doctrine, but also the role played by individuals- litigants and lawyers, policy-makers and judges, teachers, scholars, playwrights, and the literate public-in giving form and life to doctrine. In undertaking an examination of the Negre case, this Article will consider profound questions of constitutional law, involving, on the one hand, Congress's power to raise armies and, on the other, the First Amendment's guarantee of religious liberty. It will also consider questions of Catholic moral teaching. From earliest times, Catholic theologians and canonists cast a suspicious eye on Warfare and sought 13 See infra notes 443-80 and accompanying text. 14 Id 15 Id. 16 JOHN T. NOONAN, JR., PoWER TO DISSOLVE: LV¢,-antS AND MIRRIAGES IN THE COURTS OF THE RoiAN CURIA (1972). 17 JOHN T. NOONAN,JR., PERSONS AND MLISK OF THE Lx QuR.ozo, HOLtMS,JEF- FERSON, AND W'1 THE AS MAKERS OF THE MASKS (1976). 18 JOHN T. NOONAN, JR., THE ANTELOPE: THE ORDEAL OF THE RE Cu, RED AFrF. CANS IN THE ADMINISTRATIONS OFJAMES MONROE AND JO N QLyi.NC, AD. lts (1977). 19 JOHN T. NooNAN, JR., BRIBES (1984). 20 NooNAN, supra note 1. NOTRE DAME LAW REVIEW [VOL- 76:3 to put limits around its use. Deeply indebted to the lessons Judge Noonan has taught us on the proper way to write legal history, this Article will, above all, consider the interaction of persons with the re- quirements of conscience and the demands of law, in a leading anti- war case of the late 1960s. I. "I MUST OBEY THE ORDER OF CONSCIENCE": THE FORMATION OF Louis NEGRE'S CONSCIENCE AND THE DEMANDS OF THE PoWIERS THAT ARE Louis Auguste Negre was born in Nice, France in July 1947 and immigrated with his parents to the United States in 1952, where they settled in Bakersfield, California.