128. The spirit vs. the letter of the law
128. THE SPIRIT VS. THE LETTER OF THE LAW
Should the spirit of the law ever trump the letter, the literal?
Hilary says: The meaning of what is said is according to the motive for saying it; because things are not subject to speech but speech to things. Therefore we should take account of the motive of the lawgiver rather than of his very words. . . . Now it happens often that the observance of some point of law conduces to the common weal in the majority of instances and yet in some cases is very hurtful. Since then the lawgiver cannot have in view every single case, he shapes the law according to what happens most frequently, by directing his attention to the common good. Wherefore if a case arise wherein the observance of that law would be hurtful to the general welfare, it should not be observed. For instance, suppose that in a besieged city it be an established law that the gates are to be kept closed. This is good for public welfare as a general rule, but if it were to happen that the enemy are in pursuit of certain citizens who are defenders of the city, it would be a great loss to the city if the gates were not opened to them; and so in that case the gates ought to be opened, contrary to the letter of the law, in order to maintain the common weal which the lawgiver had in view.
Nevertheless it must be noted that if the observance of the law according to the letter does not involve any sudden risk needing instant remedy, it is not competent for everyone to expound what is useful and what is not useful to the state; those alone can do this who are in authority, and who on account of such like cases have the power to dispense from the laws. If, however, the peril be so sudden as not to allow of the delay involved by referring the matter to authority, the mere necessity brings with it a dispensation, since necessity knows no law. . . . He who in a case of necessity acts beside the letter of the law does not judge of the law but of a particular case in which he sees that the letter of the law is not to be observed (I-II,96,6).
The reason the spirit sometimes should trump the letter is that the point of law is to align two wills: the will of the lawgiver and the will of the law-obeyers. If, as sometimes happens, obedience to the letter of the law would violate obedience to the will of the lawgiver, then disobedience to the letter is required by the very spirit or essence of the law, namely obedience to the lawgiver’s will.
The clearest and strongest example of this is Jesus’ works of healing on the Sabbath, which the legalistic Pharisees opposed because they broke the letter of the law; and His justification for them was that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Legalism—the idolatry of worshipping and absolutizing the law instead of the Lawgiver—is a temptation in every age; but the saints are never legalists. They know the Person of God too well.
Our doctor once sped down the Massachusetts Turnpike at ninety miles per hour and crashed through a toll gate to get an infant to a downtown hospital before she died. He was a hero, not a lawbreaker, because the intent of the lawmakers in erecting speed limits and toll gates was to save lives, and his acts fulfilled that intent. The authority of the lawmakers was respected in the very act of disobeying the letter of their law.
This was a rarity: a sudden emergency that justified breaking civil laws. In most cases of religious law, church law, or canon law, there is plenty of time to appeal to proper authority for dispensation from the letter of the law. But both cases are decided out of respect for authority, not disrespect. (“Authority”, of course, does not mean “power” but “right”. Might does not make right.)
The letter of the law is there precisely to express its spirit, and it usually does. That is why disobedience to the letter must always be exceptional, and it always needs special justification, as obedience does not. If the letter expressed the spirit perfectly and always, no disobedience to the letter would ever be justified; if the letter expressed the spirit rarely, disobedience would often be justified.