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

Contextualism had particular applicability to the factual scenario that produced Thomas More's dilemma of conscience. Thomas Cromwell served Henry VIII in several key political offices that provided him unique insight into the effectiveness of government and the need for reforms.110 Serving as secretary to the King, Cromwell doggedly sought to appease Henry VIII. He not only supported the King's proclamations,111 but also sought Thomas More's open endorsement of those proclamations.112 Cromwell, labeled a "pragmatic craftsmen," took a contextual approach to the conflict between More and Henry VIII.113 He allegedly saw the law as "nothing but an instrument or a weapon."114 So pragmatic was Cromwell, that some found him devoid of any legal conviction.115

To dismiss Thomas Cromwell simply as an unprincipled pragmatist without conviction, however, is somewhat superficial, if not extreme. Cromwell was the quintessential contextualist, who likely viewed law as a facilitator of social order. He believed that Henry VIIF s dominion over the Church would serve to unite England under one sovereign, and contribute to an orderly society replete with pooled resources to minimize poverty and waste, maximize wealth, and provide more citizens with a sense of dignity and purpose.116 Towards this end, laws apparently designed to further such utilitarian goals were generously interpreted.117 Cromwell seemingly believed that the maintenance of social order related also to the fulfillment of the sovereign's will, a belief that compelled strategic action in furtherance of the will of the sovereign. Assertion of the King's supremacy over the Church appeared to create a greater sense of national sovereignty that might bring about greater societal good."8 Cromwell's decision to view Henry VIII's proclamations as guarantors of social order manifested the humanism that is such an integral feature of contextualism.119 Blind faith in the sovereign's will as insurer of societal order remained a speculative, and, perhaps, risky judgment.

As history and Bolt's play document, Cromwell's contextual approach attempted to persuade More to accommodate Henry VIII's proclamations.120 He sought to achieve a compromise between More's dominant, personally held beliefs, and the King's expectations. In fact, Cromwell allegedly tried vainly to persuade More against any direct denunciation of the King's proclamations, and "would rather have seen his own son beheaded than be a witness to More's refusal."121 More's defiance, of course, underscored the depth of his natural law-based beliefs.122 His rejection of Cromwell's approach, however, had far greater philosophical significance. To More, laws, not context, formed social bonds that sustained society.123 Cromwell's contextualism did not preserve social order, but instead detracted from society's more fundamental need to adhere to law as a conviction rather than social convenience.124 More, therefore, could not embrace any contextual response that caused individuals to stray from the true letter of law, particularly Divinely related law.