LESSONS FROM THOMAS MORE'S DILEMMA OF CONSCIENCE: RECONCILING THE CLASH BETWEEN A LAWYER'S BELIEFS AND PROFESSIONAL EXPECTATIONS

St. John's Law Review, Fall 2004 by Morant, Blake D

[More] applied his whole mind to exercises of piety, looking to and pondering on the priesthood in vigils, fasts, and prayers and similar austerities. In which matter he proved himself far more prudent than most candidates who thrust themselves rashly into that arduous profession without any previous trial of their powers. The one thing that prevented him from giving himself to that kind of life was that he could not shake off the desire of the married state. He chose, therefore to be a chaste husband rather than an impure priest.36

More's disappointment with corruption within monastical orders37 failed to weaken moralistic beliefs that continually influenced his personal and professional life.38

More's personally held beliefs, which were based upon theological dogma, have a clear nexus with natural law. Perhaps most probative of this point is natural law's commonly understood derivation from God, the Supreme Being.39 Natural law, thus, reflects the will of God and, therefore, commands greater respect and obedience.40 Natural laws are endemic to human nature.41 Given their genesis from the Supreme Being, which lies at the foundation of human existence,42 these laws sustain humanity and actually become components of human nature.43 The symbiotic link between the Divinity and human nature represents the very essence of natural law.44 That linkage also provides natural laws with presumptive validity, and commensurately compels greater deference for these more Divine prescriptions.45

Other conceptualizations of natural law emphasize the need for social order and structure rather than a reflection of divine prescription.46 The maintenance of order and discipline through structure and fulfillment of basic human needs become the fundamental goals of modern natural law.47 The legal structures of the United States clearly demonstrate the merger of societal order and human rights. Perhaps the greatest paradigm of this principle is the Constitution of the United States, which, as natural law, "prescribes the right of self-preservation or life as well as the right to live and develop in community."48 As a consequence, natural law assumes a higher authority that embodies both morality and rationality.49 Rational, and perhaps more significantly, moral laws reflect a higher order.50 Instead of nature, modern natural law focuses more upon ethics and morality.51

Morality and natural law are, however, symbiotic. Moral premises, as subsets of natural law, have strong connections to tenets of the Supreme Being.53 While morality may not be the exclusive litmus test for societal norms,54 it certainly becomes a strong barometer of the legitimacy of those norms. In terms of hierarchy, morality often takes priority over customs, traditions, and of course, human-made proclamations.55

Natural law can check the legitimacy of human-made laws.56 Humanmade laws are moral, rational, and, therefore, legitimate under natural law principles if they promote human needs and foster a general state of wellbeing.57 As a consequence, natural law, which preserves humankind and is Divinely conceived, is manifestly fair and commands obedience. In the alternative, laws or legal rules that are inapposite to human nature and the constructs of natural laws are invalid and should not be followed.58 Of course, key variables in this checking function remain the personal beliefs, views, and perceptions of those who evaluate the validity of positive laws. The ultimate decision of validity, which depends upon the extent to which positive laws conform to natural law objectives, may vary depending upon the evaluator's interpretation of those laws.