Notes on the JRCLS Annual Broadcast

Last night was the J. Reuben Clark Law Society’s  Annual Broadcast, with the main address coming from Elder D. Todd Christofferson. I’m sure a version of his remarks will eventually make it into the JRCLS’ bi-annual publication, the Clark Memorandum, but Elder Christofferson said a few things that I thought were worth mentioning.

His address was entitled “Law and Becoming.” One thing I noticed about Elder Christofferson’s address was the wide variety of quotations he used, from a range of sources. For example, he quoted this from Pope John Paul II’s Encyclical Veritatis splendor about the laws of man and the laws of God:

Because there can be no freedom apart from or in opposition to the truth, the categorical — unyielding and uncompromising — defence of the absolutely essential demands of man’s personal dignity must be considered the way and the condition for the very existence of freedom.

This service is directed to every man, considered in the uniqueness and singularity of his being and existence: only by obedience to universal moral norms does man find full confirmation of his personal uniqueness and the possibility of authentic moral growth. For this very reason, this service is also directed to all mankind: it is not only for individuals but also for the community, for society as such. These norms in fact represent the unshakable foundation and solid guarantee of a just and peaceful human coexistence, and hence of genuine democracy, which can come into being and develop only on the basis of the equality of all its members, who possess common rights and duties. When it is a matter of the moral norms prohibiting intrinsic evil, there are no privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the “poorest of the poor” on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality we are all absolutely equal. [Emphasis in the original.]

In a similar vein, Elder Christofferson quoted a saying attributed to the Prophet Muhammad about the duty citizens have:

“Whoever amongst you sees an evil, he must change it with his hand; if he is  unable to do so, then with his tongue; and if he is unable to do so, then with his heart; and that is the weakest form of Faith”.

Throughout his speech, Elder Christofferson drew repeated comparisons between God’s laws and the laws of man. Interestingly, his position wasn’t that the laws of man were corrupt and forever inferior to the laws of God. He said that God delegates to His children the job of establishing and administering laws for the good of society. In his opinion, the laws of man often carry out divine principles such as protecting freedoms, defending the weak, ensuring the fruits of our labors, and diminishing violence. He asserted that, as a general principle, obediance to man’s laws provides freedoms to citizens. (Elder Christofferson did acknowledge, however, that not all laws come from God, and jokingly cited the tax code in its entirety as one such example. Since it’s currently tax season, this joke actually got some applause from the crowd.)

I thought his comments about law and agency were interesting. Since agency has such a central role in the Plan of Salvation, it is especially important the the laws we design and establish protect our agency. At the beginning of his address, Elder Christofferson recounted what we know of our premortal existence. He talked about how Lucifer wanted both the power of compulsion and the mantle of God. In demanding the power of God, Elder Christofferson thinks he was also seeking the power to establish law, which he would have used arbitrarily and for his own selfish purposes. It made me think about how that pattern of misuse of the rule of law is played out in many corrupt regimes, and that combating that sort of corruption is one of the duties of practitioners of the law.

Perhaps the topic most likely to generate discussion was Elder Christofferson’s remarks on how we should seek to enact and administer laws the emobody the same principles as God’s laws. He made the distinction between good laws and enforcing our values on others. He wasn’t advocating any sort of theocracy, but in rejecting legal realism and legal positivism, he did note that all laws have an inherent moral component. Elder Christofferson said something to the effect of, “We whose first loyalties are to God can advocate for laws that favor those principles or at least do not undermine it. This is not to say that we impose our values. By the same token, just because a group advocates based on deeply held moral values, it does not mean that they should be prohibited by other groups with different but equally deeply held beliefs.” I’m obviously paraphrasing, but it’s interesting thought that I’m looking forward to reading more of when his address is printed. The Church is getting pretty good about releasing speeches and talks pretty quickly, so hopefully we won’t have to wait until the next Clark Memorandum to review it.