Kevin Walsh

A lawyer is an agent for the client as well as a moral agent in his or her own right. A lawyer’s actions on behalf of a client are still that lawyer’s own actions even if they are also the actions of the client.

When lawyers who represent the United States government resign because they cannot in good conscience take an action that the United States government desires them to undertake, that is a sign of personal integrity.

For more on the judgment of conscience, see Nos. 57 to 61 in Veritatis Splendor (below)

The resigning lawyer’s judgment of conscience may or may not be accurate, but if it is the judgment of conscience then it must be heeded. As Pope St. John Paul II wrote in Veritatis Splendor, “Like the natural law itself and all practical knowledge, the judgment of conscience also has an imperative character: man must act in accordance with it. If man acts against this judgment or, in a case where he lacks certainty about the rightness and goodness of a determined act, still performs that act, he stands condemned by his own conscience, the proximate norm of personal morality.” (VS 60)

The judgment of conscience

57. The text of the Letter to the Romans which has helped us to grasp the essence of the natural law also indicates the biblical understanding of conscience, especially in its specific connection with the law: “When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law unto themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them” (Rom 2:14-15).

According to Saint Paul, conscience in a certain sense confronts man with the law, and thus becomes a “witness” for man: a witness of his own faithfulness or unfaithfulness with regard to the law, of his essential moral rectitude or iniquity. Conscience is the only witness, since what takes place in the heart of the person is hidden from the eyes of everyone outside. Conscience makes its witness known only to the person himself. And, in turn, only the person himself knows what his own response is to the voice of conscience.

58. The importance of this interior dialogue of man with himself can never be adequately appreciated. But it is also a dialogue of man with God, the author of the law, the primordial image and final end of man. Saint Bonaventure teaches that “conscience is like God’s herald and messenger; it does not command things on its own authority, but commands them as coming from God’s authority, like a herald when he proclaims the edict of the king. This is why conscience has binding force”.¹⁰³ Thus it can be said that conscience bears witness to man’s own rectitude or iniquity to man himself but, together with this and indeed even beforehand, conscience is the witness of God himself, whose voice and judgment penetrate the depths of man’s soul, calling him fortiter et suaviter to obedience. “Moral conscience does not close man within an insurmountable and impenetrable solitude, but opens him to the call, to the voice of God. In this, and not in anything else, lies the entire mystery and the dignity of the moral conscience: in being the place, the sacred place where God speaks to man”.¹⁰⁴

59. Saint Paul does not merely acknowledge that conscience acts as a “witness”; he also reveals the way in which conscience performs that function. He speaks of “conflicting thoughts” which accuse or excuse the Gentiles with regard to their behaviour (cf. Rom 2:15). The term “conflicting thoughts” clarifies the precise nature of conscience: it is a moral judgment about man and his actions, a judgment either of acquittal or of condemnation, according as human acts are in conformity or not with the law of God written on the heart. In the same text the Apostle clearly speaks of the judgment of actions, the judgment of their author and the moment when that judgment will be definitively rendered: “(This will take place) on that day when, according to my Gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus” (Rom 2:16).

The judgment of conscience is a practical judgment, a judgment which makes known what man must do or not do, or which assesses an act already performed by him. It is a judgment which applies to a concrete situation the rational conviction that one must love and do good and avoid evil. This first principle of practical reason is part of the natural law; indeed it constitutes the very foundation of the natural law, inasmuch as it expresses that primordial insight about good and evil, that reflection of God’s creative wisdom which, like an imperishable spark (scintilla animae), shines in the heart of every man. But whereas the natural law discloses the objective and universal demands of the moral good, conscience is the application of the law to a particular case; this application of the law thus becomes an inner dictate for the individual, a summons to do what is good in this particular situation. Conscience thus formulates moral obligation in the light of the natural law: it is the obligation to do what the individual, through the workings of his conscience, knows to be a good he is called to do here and now. The universality of the law and its obligation are acknowledged, not suppressed, once reason has established the law’s application in concrete present circumstances. The judgment of conscience states “in an ultimate way” whether a certain particular kind of behaviour is in conformity with the law; it formulates the proximate norm of the morality of a voluntary act, “applying the objective law to a particular case”.¹⁰⁵

60. Like the natural law itself and all practical knowledge, the judgment of conscience also has an imperative character: man must act in accordance with it. If man acts against this judgment or, in a case where he lacks certainty about the rightness and goodness of a determined act, still performs that act, he stands condemned by his own conscience, the proximate norm of personal morality. The dignity of this rational forum and the authority of its voice and judgments derive from the truth about moral good and evil, which it is called to listen to and to express. This truth is indicated by the “divine law”, the universal and objective norm of morality. The judgment of conscience does not establish the law; rather it bears witness to the authority of the natural law and of the practical reason with reference to the supreme good, whose attractiveness the human person perceives and whose commandments he accepts. “Conscience is not an independent and exclusive capacity to decide what is good and what is evil. Rather there is profoundly imprinted upon it a principle of obedience vis-à-vis the objective norm which establishes and conditions the correspondence of its decisions with the commands and prohibitions which are at the basis of human behaviour”.¹⁰⁶

61. The truth about moral good, as that truth is declared in the law of reason, is practically and concretely recognized by the judgment of conscience, which leads one to take responsibility for the good or the evil one has done. If man does evil, the just judgment of his conscience remains within him as a witness to the universal truth of the good, as well as to the malice of his particular choice. But the verdict of conscience remains in him also as a pledge of hope and mercy: while bearing witness to the evil he has done, it also reminds him of his need, with the help of God’s grace, to ask forgiveness, to do good and to cultivate virtue constantly.

Consequently in the practical judgment of conscience, which imposes on the person the obligation to perform a given act, the link between freedom and truth is made manifest. Precisely for this reason conscience expresses itself in acts of “judgment” which reflect the truth about the good, and not in arbitrary “decisions”. The maturity and responsibility of these judgments — and, when all is said and done, of the individual who is their subject — are not measured by the liberation of the conscience from objective truth, in favour of an alleged autonomy in personal decisions, but, on the contrary, by an insistent search for truth and by allowing oneself to be guided by that truth in one’s actions.

The New York Times has published a confession of sorts by Taffy Brodesser-Akner, titled “Why on Earth Have I Seen the Same Broadway Show 13 Times? An Investigation.” It’s worth reading, at least if you’re at roughly the same time of life as its author (and this post’s author). The piece can be read as a journalistic translation into our contemporary times of themes from Walker Percy’s The Moviegoer. There are differences between Taffy Brodesser-Akner and Binx Bolling, but similarities as well.

In his Address to the Diplomatic Corps two days ago, Pope Leo singled out the importance of ensuring the connection between words and reality. The “meaning of words” is this connection of words to reality. Pope Leo stated:

Rediscovering the meaning of words is perhaps one of the primary challenges of our time.  When words lose their connection to reality, and reality itself becomes debatable and ultimately incommunicable, we become like the two people to whom Saint Augustine refers, who are forced to stay together without either of them knowing the other’s language.  He observes that, “Dumb animals, even those of different species, understand each other more easily than these two individuals.  For even though they are both human beings, their common nature is no help to friendliness when they are prevented by diversity of language from conveying their sentiments to one another; so that a man would more readily converse with his dog than with a foreigner!” [6]

Today, the meaning of words is ever more fluid, and the concepts they represent are increasingly ambiguous. Language is no longer the preferred means by which human beings come to know and encounter one another. Moreover, in the contortions of semantic ambiguity, language is becoming more and more a weapon with which to deceive, or to strike and offend opponents. We need words once again to express distinct and clear realities unequivocally. Only in this way can authentic dialogue resume without misunderstandings. This should happen in our homes and public spaces, in politics, in the media and on social media.

[6] Saint Augustine, De Civ. Dei, XIX, 7.

These reflections emerged out of a discussion of multilateralism in foreign relations and returned back into that topic. The problem of the connection of words to reality is, of course, also central to the challenges posed by generative artificial “intelligence” that Pope Leo has highlighted from the beginning of his pontificate. This problem is at the heart of so much else, as Pope Leo explains further on in this address, including many challenges that those of us in the legal profession need to aid our societies in confronting.

On January 9, 2026, Pope Leo XIV delivered an Address to Members of the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See. The address begins in the present moment, so to speak, with Pope Leo acknowledging that he was new to this particular event that was traditional for the diplomatic corps. Pope Leo welcomed representatives from nations that newly established representations to the Holy See, referred to the closing of the Holy Doors from the Jubilee year, and thanked the people of Rome.

The people of Rome serve as something of a transition appoint in the Address. With his direct address, “Dear Ambassadors,” effecting the transition, Pope Leo then begins a more formal set of reflections beginning with consideration of St. Augustine’s City of God:

Dear Ambassadors,

Prompted by the tragic events of the sack of Rome in 410 AD, Saint Augustine wrote De Civitate Dei, The City of God. This is one of the most powerful of his theological, philosophical and literary works. As Pope Benedict XVI observed, it is an “impressive work crucial to the development of Western political thought and the Christian theology of history.” [1] It draws, as we would say in contemporary terms, on a “narrative” that was spreading, for “the pagans, still numerous at that time, and even quite a few Christians, thought that the God of the new religion and the Apostles themselves had shown themselves incapable of protecting the city. In the days of the pagan gods, Rome was caput mundi, the great capital, and no one could have imagined that it would fall into the hands of its enemies. Now, with the God of the Christians, this great city no longer seemed secure.” [2]

Certainly, our times are very distant from those events. This is not simply a question of temporal distance, but also of a different cultural awareness and a development of categories of thought. However, we cannot overlook the fact that our own cultural sensibilities have drawn nourishment from that work, which, like all the classics, speaks to people of every generation.

[1] Benedict XVI, Catechesis (20 February 2008).

[2] Ibid.

Before going over to read the whole, it is perhaps worthy of pausing to consider how the Augustinian Pope Leo signaled continuity with his predecessor Pope Benedict XIV by citing Benedict’s catechesis regarding Augustinian texts so important to both of them.

Continuing with reflections on the first chapter of the Gospel of John in an Augustinian key, here is the paragraph from Augustine’s Sermon 117 that includes the oft-quoted phrase “Si comprehendis, non est deus”:

It is said, “And the Word was God.” We are speaking of God; what marvel, if thou do not comprehend? For if thou comprehend, He is not God. Be there a pious confession of ignorance, rather than a rash profession of knowledge. To reach to God in any measure by the mind, is a great blessedness; but to comprehend Him. is altogether impossible. God is an object for the mind, He is to be understood; a body is for the eyes, it is to be seen. But thinkest thou that thou comprehendest a body by the eye? Thou canst not at all. For whatever thou lookest at, thou dost not see the whole. If thou seest a man’s face, thou dost not see his back at the thee thou seest the face; and when thou seest the back, thou dost not at that thee see the face. Thou dost not then so see, as to comprehend; but when thou seest another part which thou hadst not seen before, unless memory aid thee to remember that thou hast seen that from which thou dost withdraw, thou couldest never say that thou hadst comprehended anything even on the surface. Thou handiest what thou seest, turnest it about on this side and that, or thyself dost go round it to see the whole. In one view then thou canst not see the whole. And as long as thou turnest it about to see it, thou art but seeing the parts; and by putting together that thou hast seen the other parts, thou dost fancy that thou seest the whole. But this must not be understood as the sight of the eyes, but the activity of the memory. What then can be said, Brethren, of that Word? Lo, of the bodies which are before our eyes we say they cannot comprehend them by a glance; what eye of the heart then comprehendeth God? Enough that it reach to Him if the eye be pure. But if it reach, it reacheth by a sort of incorporeal and spiritual touch, yet it doth not comprehend; and that, only if it be pure. And a man is made blessed by touching with the heart That which ever abideth Blessed; and that is this Very Everlasting Blessedness, and that Everlasting Life, whereby man is made to live; that Perfect Wisdom, whereby man is made wise; that Everlasting Light, whereby man becomes enlightened. And see how by this touch thou art made what thou wast not, thou dost not make that thou touchest be what it was not before. I repeat it, there grows no increase to God from them that know Him, but to them that know Him, from the knowledge of God. Let us not suppose, dearly beloved Brethren, that we confer any benefit on God, because I have said that we give Him in a manner a price. For we do not give Him aught whereby He can be increased, Who when thou fallest away, is Entire, and when thou returnest, abideth Entire, ready to make Himself seen that He may bless those who turn to Him, and punish those with blindness who turn away. For by this blindness, as the beginning of punishment, doth He first execute vengeance on the soul that turns away from Him. For whoso turns away from the True Light, that is from God, is at once made blind. He is not yet sensible of his punishment, but he hath it already.

There are many insights in this passage that one can reflect on (including the limits of insights!). At this moment, one that stands out to me is less about the limits of knowledge of God, but rather the limits even of corporeal vision without memory. Somewhere in between is comprehension of something like a law that begins at a moment in time and continues in force through multiple generations, though always subject to stopping to exist as law.

Chief Justice John Roberts begins his 2025 Year-End Report with a meditation on Thomas Paine’s Common Sense. Among the points Roberts highlights in anticipation of the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence is Paine’s urging Americans to think of themselves as Americans. More precisely, Roberts focuses on Paine’s urging of the “colonists” to understand themselves as “a distinctive people”:

Shunning legalese and embracing language that ordinary citizens could understand, Paine advanced several key points. A government’s purpose is to serve the people. The colonists should view themselves as a distinctive people—Americans, not British subjects. The colonies had reached “that peculiar time which never happens to a nation but once, viz., the time of forming itself into a government.” And, in view of the foregoing propositions, as an independent nation, the colonists would “have it in our power to begin the world over again.”

The unity of this one distinctive people as Americans in 1776 is what enabled that people’s creation of the Constitution that went into effect as law in 1789.

Pope Leo XIV has delivered a beautiful video message to American young adults at SEEK 2026 in Columbus (Ohio), Denver (Colorado), and Fort Worth (Texas). The message is a meditation on the first words attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of John, “What do you seek?” These words are addressed to two disciples of John who follow Jesus. Here is the passage from John 1:

35 The next day John was there again with two of his disciples, 36 and as he watched Jesus walk by, he said, “Behold, the Lamb of God.” 37 The two disciples heard what he said and followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned and saw them following him and said to them, “What are you looking for?” They said to him, “Rabbi” (which translated means Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 He said to them, “Come, and you will see.” So they went and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day. It was about four in the afternoon. 40 Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two who heard John and followed Jesus. 41 He first found his own brother Simon and told him, “We have found the Messiah” (which is translated Anointed). 42 Then he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon the son of John; you will be called Cephas” (which is translated Peter).

Pope Leo draws our attention to the way in which Jesus’s question is a response to our own good kind of restlessness. Responsiveness to this restlessness can draw us to follow Jesus, which in turn draws us outward to share this with others. The Pope speaks directly to attendees in the second person, encouraging them to seek direct encounter with Christ. He states that Jesus asked the question “What are you looking for?” (or, in the Pope’s occasion-appropriate rendering, “what do you seek?”) in part because Jesus already knew the answer. Indeed, Pope Leo explains, Jesus Himself is the answer.

Jesus asks this question to his disciples because he knows their hearts. They were restless, in a good way. They didn’t want to settle for the normal routine of life. They were open to God and longed to find meaning. Today, Jesus asks each of you the same question. Dear young people, what are you seeking? Why are you here at this conference? Perhaps your hearts are also restless, searching for meaning and fulfillment, for direction in life. The answer can be found in a person. Only the Lord Jesus brings us true peace and joy and fulfills each of our deepest desires.

The Pope goes on to exhort his audiences to “Be open to what the Lord has in store for you!”:

The disciples respond by asking where he lives. It wasn’t enough for someone else to tell them that Jesus was the Lamb of God; they wanted to know him personally by spending time with him. During this conference, you too will have the opportunity to spend time with the Lord. Like Andrew, for some of you, this may be your first real encounter with Christ. For others, this weekend will be an opportunity to deepen your relationship with him as well as your understanding of the Catholic faith. Be open to what the Lord has in store for you!

The two disciples initially stayed with Jesus for only a few hours, but that encounter changed their lives forever. The first thing Andrew did was go and tell his brother Simon, “We have found the Messiah” (v. 41); in other words, “We have found the one we were looking for!” This is the response we can all give once we come to know the Lord. This passage, therefore, tells us what it means to be missionaries. After meeting Jesus, Andrew could not help but share with his brother what he had found. Indeed, missionary zeal is born from an encounter with Christ. We desire to share with others what we have received, so that they too may know the fullness of love and truth found only in him. I pray that, as you leave this conference, all of you will be moved by this same missionary zeal to share with those around you the joy you have received from an authentic encounter with the Lord.

The full text of the message can be found on the Vatican website.

My notice of 2026 annual dues for my Knights of Columbus council arrived in my inbox on December 31, 2025. I have been researching these days the meaning of “due” in connection with a writing project on the meaning of “justice” in the U.S. Constitution’s Preamble. This meaning, I contend, is best understood in light of the virtue justice, understood as the will to render to each their due. So dues have been on my mind.

According to Gregory E. Maggs, A Concise Guide to Using Dictionaries from the Founding Era to Determine the Original Meaning of the Constitution, 82 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 358, 386 (2014), members of the Supreme Court have cited Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary more than any other dictionary from the 1700s.

Here are some of Johnson’s definitions of “just” and “due” (from the 1773 edition):

JUST. adj. [juste, Fr. justus, Latin.]
1. Upright; incorrupt; equitable in the distribution of justice. Take it, while yet ’tis praise, before my rage Unsafely just, break loose on this bad age. Dryden. Men are commonly so just to virtue and goodness, as to praise it in others, even when they do not practise it themselves. Tillotson’s Sermons. 2. Honest; without crime in dealing with others. Just balances, just weights, and a just ephah. Lev. xix. 3. I know not whether just of has any other authority. Just of thy word, in ev’ry thought sincere, Who knew no wish but what the world might hear. Pope. 4. Exact; proper; accurate. Boileau’s numbers are excellent, his expressions noble, his thoughts just, his language pure, and his sense close. Dryden. These scenes were wrought, Embellish’d with good morals and just thought. Granville. Just precepts thus from great examples giv’n, She drew from them what they deriv’d from Heav’n. Pope. Just to the tale, as present at the fray, Or taught the labours of the dreadful way. Pope. Once on a time La Mancha’s knight, they say, A certain bard encount’ring on the way, Discours’d in terms as just, with looks as sage, As ere could Dennis of the laws o’ th’ stage. Pope. Though the syllogism be irregular, yet the inferences are just and true. Watts’s Logick. 5. Virtuous; innocent; pure. How should man be just with God? Job. A just man falleth seven times and riseth. Proverbs. He shall be recompensed at the resurrection of the just. ‡ Mat. The just th’ unjust to serve. Milton. 6. True; not forged. Crimes were laid to his charge too many, the least whereof being just, had bereaved him of estimation and credit. Hooker. 7. Grounded on principles of justice; rightful. Me though just right Did first create your leader. Milton. 8. Equally retributed. He received a just recompence of reward. Heb. ii. 2 Whose damnation is just. Rom. iii. 8. As Hesoid sings, spread water o’er thy fields, And a most just and glad increase it yields. Denham. 9. Complete without superfluity or defect. He was a comely personage, a little above just stature, well and strait limbed, but slender. Bacon’s Henry VII. 10. Regular; orderly. When all The war shall stand ranged in its just array, And dreadful pomp, then will I think on thee. Addison. 11. Exactly proportioned. The prince is here at hand: pleaseth your lordship To meet his grace, just distance ’tween our armies? Shakespeare. 12. Full; of full dimensions. His soldiers had skirmishes with the Numidians, so that once the skirmish was like to have come to a just battle. Knolles’s History. There is not any one particular above mentioned, but would take up the business of a just volume. Hale’s Orig. of Mank. There seldom appeared a just army in the civil wars. Dutchess of Newcastle.

Due. n.s. [from the adjective.] 1. That which belongs to one; that which may be justly claimed. My due from thee is this imperial crown, Which, as immediate from thy place and blood, Derives itself to me. Shakespeare. The son of Duncan, From whom this tyrant holds the due of birth, Lives in the English court. Shakespeare’s Macbeth. Thou better know’st Effects of courtesy, dues of gratitude: Thy half o’ th’ kingdom thou hast not forgot, Wherein I thee endow’d. Shakespeare’s King Lear. The due of honour in no point omit. Shakesp. Cymbeline. I take this garland, not as given by you, But as my merit, and my beauty’s due. Dryden. No popular assembly ever knew, or proposed, or declared what share of power was their due. Swift. 2. Right; just title. The key of this infernal pit by due, And by command of heav’n’s all-powerful king, I keep. Milton’s Paradise Lost. 3. Whatever custom or law requires to be done. Befriend Us thy vow’d priests, ’till outmost end Of all thy dues be done, and none left out. Milton. They pay the dead his annual dues. Dryden. 4. Custom; tribute; exactions; legal or customary perquisites. In respect of the exorbitant dues that are paid at most other ports, this deservedly retains the name of free. Addison.

Pope Leo XIV titled his final Saturday Jubilee audience for the Jubilee Year initiated by Pope Francis, “To hope is to generate. Mary, our hope.” This catechesis connects Mary’s generativeness with the theological virtue of hope:

Sisters and brothers, if Christian prayer is so deeply Marian, it is because in Mary of Nazareth we see one of us who generates. God made her fruitful and came towards us with her features, just as every son resembles his mother. She is the Mother of God, and our Mother. “Our hope”, we say in the Salve Regina. She resembles the Son, and the Son resembles her. And we resemble this Mother who gave a face, a body, a voice to the Word of God. We resemble her, because we can generate the Word of God here below, transforming the cry we hear into a birth. Jesus wants to be born again: we can give him body and voice. This is the birth that creation awaits.

To hope is to generate. To hope is to see this world become God’s world: the world in which God, human beings and all creatures walk together again, in the garden city, the new Jerusalem. May Mary, our hope, always accompany our pilgrimage of faith and hope.

Pope Leo XIV concluded his General Audience of December 31, 2025 “by remembering the words with which Saint Paul VI, at the end of the Jubilee of 1975, described its fundamental message”:

It is contained, he said, in one word: “love”. And he added, “God is Love! This is the ineffable revelation with which the Jubilee, through its teaching, its indulgence, its forgiveness and finally its peace, full of tears and joy, has sought to fill our spirit today and our lives tomorrow: God is Love! God loves me! God awaited me, and I have found him! God is mercy! God is forgiveness! God is salvation! God, yes, God is life!” (General Audience, 17 December 1975). May these thoughts accompany us in the passage from the old to the new year, and then always, in our lives.

I put the title of this post in the original Italian because it is too easy for native English speakers to ignore the profound propositional truth and Truth in the statement “God is Love,” especially when punctuated with an exclamation mark. It is an unfortunate reality, but a reality nonetheless, that “God is Love!” is more likely to come across as a vacuous exhortation or indifferent platitude evacuated of substantive content than “the ineffable revelation with whcih the Jubilee, through its teaching, its indulgence, its forgiveness an finally its peace, full of tears and joy has sought to fill our spirit today and our lives tomorrow.” For all that, is it true! And the splendor of truth shines forth in this Christmas season. Che Dio, Che è Amore, sia con voi nel prossimo anno solare.

A favorite line of Pope Paul VI’s that later popes that have quoted in their own teaching comes from the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (Dec. 8, 1975). In No. 41, Pope Paul VI observes that “Modern man listens more willingly to witnesses than to teachers, and if he does listen to teachers, it is because they are witnesses.”

I haven’t performed a systematic search of later papal citations of this observation, but one that I came across recently was in remarks related to evangelization given by Pope Benedict XVI on September 23, 2006:

To you, Pastors of God’s flock, is entrusted the mandate of safeguarding and transmitting faith in Christ, passed on to us through the living tradition of the Church and for which so many have given their lives. To carry out this task, it is essential that first of all you show you are “in all respects a model of good deeds, and in your teaching show integrity, gravity and sound speech that cannot be censured” (Ti 2: 7-8).

“Modern man”, wrote my Predecessor of venerable memory, the Servant of God Pope Paul VI, “listens more willingly to witnesses than to teachers, and if he does listen to teachers, it is because they are witnesses” (Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi, n. 41).

Two words that are joined together throughout the CDF’s 1986 Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation are “truth” and “justice.” The latter is often described as gesturing toward an ideal. But Christianity affirms the eventual reality of “a finally perfect justice for the living and the dead.” This is discussed in Paragraphs 59-60:

The final meeting with Christ

59. The transfiguration by the Risen Christ of the Church at the end of her pilgrimage in no way cancels out the personal destiny of each individual at the end of his or her life. All those found worthy before Christ’s tribunal for having, by the grace of God, made good use of their free will are to receive the reward of happiness.(80) They will be made like to God, for they will see him as he is.(81) The divine gift of eternal happiness is the exaltation of the greatest freedom which can be imagined.

Eschatological hope and the commitment for temporal liberation

60. This hope does not weaken commitment to the progress of the earthly city, but rather gives it meaning and strength. It is of course important to make a careful distinction between earthly progress and the growth of the Kingdom, which do not belong to the same order. Nonetheless, this distinction is not a separation; for man’s vocation to eternal life does not suppress but confirms his task of using the energies and means which he has received from the Creator for developing his temporal life.(82) Enlightened by the Lord’s Spirit, Christ’s Church can discern in the signs of the times the ones which advance liberation and those that are deceptive and illusory. She calls man and societies to overcome situations of sin and injustice and to establish the conditions for true freedom. She knows that we shall rediscover all these good things – human dignity, fraternal union and freedom – which are the result of efforts in harmony with God’s will, “washed clean of all stain, illumined and transfigured when Christ will hand over to the Father the eternal and universal kingdom”,(83) which is a Kingdom of freedom. The vigilant and active expectation of the coming of the Kingdom is also the expectation of a finally perfect justice for the living and the dead, for people of all times and places, a justice which Jesus Christ, installed as supreme Judge, will establish.(84) This promise, which surpasses all human possibilities, directly concerns our life in this world. For true justice must include everyone; it must bring the answer to the immense load of suffering borne by all the generations. In fact, without the resurrection of the dead and the Lord’s judgment, there is no justice in the full sense of the term. The promise of the resurrection is freely made to meet the desire for true justice dwelling in the human heart.

(80) Cf. 1 Cor 13, 12; 2 Cor 5, 10. (81) Cf. 1 Jn 3, 2. (82) Cf. Gaudium et Spes, 39, § 2. (83) Cf. ibid., 39, § 3. (84) Cf. Mt 24, 29-44. 46; Acts 10, 42; 2 Cor 5, 10.

One of my faculty colleagues shared this past Christmas morning a favorite verse from a Christmas hymn:

“For He is our childhood’s pattern;
Day by day, like us, He grew;
He was little, weak, and helpless,
Tears and smiles, like us He knew;
And He feeleth for our sadness,
And He shareth in our gladness.”

This colleague noted the way this passage beautifully echoes Hebrews 4:15, “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has similarly been tested in every way, yet without sin.”

The Feast of St. John, Evangelist in the Octave of Christmas seems an appropriate time to reflect on Hebrews 1:1-3, another “in the beginning” kind of passage:

1 In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets; 2 in these last days, he spoke to us through a son, whom he made heir of all things and through whom he created the universe, 3 who is the refulgence of his glory, the very imprint of his being, and who sustains all things by his mighty word. When he had accomplished purification from sins, he took his seat at the right hand of the Majesty on high ….

The Feast of St. Stephen is a fitting time to be reminded of the Truth that is the basis of freedom. Here is an explanation from the 1986 document from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation:

21. One of the principal errors that has seriously burdened the process of liberation since the Age of the Enlightenment comes from the widely held conviction that it is the progress achieved in the fields of the sciences, technology and economics which should serve as a basis for achieving freedom. This was a misunderstanding of the depths of freedom and its needs.

The reality of the depth of freedom has always been known to the Church, above all through the lives of a multitude of the faithful, especially among the little ones and the poor. In their faith, these latter know that they are the object of God’s infinite love. Each of them can say : ” I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me” (Gal 2:20b). Such is the dignity which none of the powerful can take away from them; such is the liberating joy present in them. They know that to them too are addressed Jesus’ words: “No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you ” (Jn 15: 15) . This sharing in the knowledge of God is their emancipation from the dominating claims of the learned: “You all know … and you have no need that any one should teach you” (1 Jn 2: 20b, 27b). They are also aware of sharing in the highest knowledge to which humanity is called. (14) They know that they are loved by God, the same as all other people and more than all other people. They thus live in the freedom which flows from truth and love.

There are several ways in which one might appreciate this passage in light of reflecting on St. Stephen’s martyrdom. Perhaps the most straightforward is to consider how the word “martyr” illuminates the relationship between truth and freedom. A “martyr” is a “witness.” Stephen first dedicated himself to serving the material needs of the Church as a deacon. This was a work that Stephen freely took on, though it is also one that he accepted after he had been chosen for it. In carrying out his diaconal duties, Stephen elicited the ire of some who debated with him. These disappointed debaters then instigated a condemning mob using false charges of blasphemy. Stephen was radiant with the splendor of truth throughout. He himself had a vision of heaven. In this sense, he was a “fact witness” in the traditional sense. While witnessing in this vision, he gave a testimony, continuing as a witness in the traditional sense. His special access to the truth gave him freedom to testify that fear might otherwise have quashed. We now look to his persistence in witnessing even in the face of death—especially in the face of death—as we consider how his example as a martyr illuminates the relationship between truth and freedom today.

Sr. Faustina, S.V., has explained the Litany of Trust as arising out of an inspired recognition that God does not so much ask as to consent to circumstances, but to Him.

The Lord just in His tenderness broke a little bit of that darkness of the months prior, and kind of lifted my eyes to His in a way, to say like, “I don’t want you to give your yes to a bunch of circumstances that can fit into your realm of understanding. I want you to give your yes, this precious gift that you have of choosing, of willing, of desiring; I want you to give that to Me.”

It was almost like He was saying, “Am I enough?” And that’s really the question that trust asks. God is saying: “Do you trust me, not for necssarily what I give you, or for what you can understand about Me, but do you trust me as a Person, as a Father, as a God, as a Friend?”

And so in that moment, it became beautifully painfully clear that I was holding on to something that really wasn’t important. What was really important in that moment was this consent to God, this free wholehearted consent, to give Him this unconditional “yes” that He had given me in creating me, in loving me into life.

In Brutus XII, the author links the Preamble’s purpose “to establish Justice” with the tendency of federal courts to extend their jurisdiction:

The second object is “to establish justice.” This must include not only the idea of instituting the rule of justice, or of making laws which shall be the measure or rule of right, but also of providing for the application of this rule or of administering justice under it. And under this the courts will in their decisions extend the power of the government to all cases they possibly can, or otherwise they will be restricted in doing what appears to be the intent of the constitution they should do, to wit, pass laws and provide for the execution of them, for the general distribution of justice between man and man. 

Brutus XII.

Brutus’s observation is brought to mind in a new context when some judges on the federal circuit courts of appeals become more active than their colleagues in writing opinions in circumstances that can reasonably be understood as aimed at attracting attention to their apprehension of the law. This kind of ambition-activated activity-level increase raises interesting questions about the unity of the virtues. One might imagine, for instance, that any activity-level increase is good for those whose office is to administer justice. The more justice, the better. But one might worry about jurisprudence being distorted into juriscraftiness. This kind of worry is not unique to ambition-activated activity-level increases, of course, but underlies many concerns about excessive judicial activity levels.

In evaluating activity-level increases activated by ambition, it may be that the vice of “solicitude for the future” provides a more precise diagnosis than craftiness. Here is Aquinas’s respondeo specifically about this vice:

No deed can be virtuous unless it is adorned with the right circumstances, one of which is the appropriate time—this according to Ecclesiastes 8:6 (“There is a time and opportunity for every business”). This is relevant not only to exterior deeds but also to interior solicitude. For to each time there belongs a proper sort of solicitude; for instance, during the summertime there is solicitude for reaping crops, whereas during the fall there is solicitude for gathering grapes. Therefore, if someone were already in the summertime solicitous about gathering grapes, he would be prematurely occupied to an excessive degree with solicitude for a future time. Hence, it is this sort of solicitude that our Lord proscribes as excessive when He says, “Do not worry about tomorrow.” That is why He adds, “For tomorrow will be solicitous about itself”—that is, it will have its own proper solicitude, which will be distressing enough for the mind. This is what He means when He adds, “The evil of the day is sufficient,” i.e., the distress of solicitude.

ST II-II Q. 55, art. 7.

In light of the recent headline that “Mentions of Scalia Surge at Conservative-Dominated Court,” it may be worth noting that the concluding Scripture passage was one of Justice Scalia’s favorites: “Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” Mt. 6:34. Indeed.

The final days of Advent bring to mind a passage from Jesus’s Last Supper discourse in John. The night before his death, a new exodus, Jesus looks ahead to God’s presence among His people in a new way, through “another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of truth.” The Holy Spirit poured into the hearts of believers will become a New Law, linking law and love in a way contemplated by the arresting statement: “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.”

15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, 17 the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you. 19 In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me, because I live and you will live. 20 On that day you will realize that I am in my Father and you are in me and I in you. 21 Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. And whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him.”
John 14:15-21.

The two themes of Pope Leo’s 2025 Christmas Greetings are mission and communion.

Pope Leo XIV explains that the Church’s missionary character “flows from the fact that God himself first set out toward us and, in Christ, came in search of us. Mission begins in the heart of the Most Holy Trinity…. The first great “exodus,” then, is God’s own — his going forth from himself to meet us. The mystery of Christmas proclaims precisely this: the Son’s mission consists in his coming into the world (cf. Saint Augustine, The Trinity, IV, 20, 28).”

This missionary character, Pope Leo XIV continues, “is closely linked to communion“:

While the mystery of Christmas celebrates the mission of the Son of God among us, it also contemplates its purpose, namely that God has reconciled the world to himself through Christ (cf. 2 Cor 5:19) and in him made us his children.  Christmas reminds us that Jesus came to reveal the true face of God as Father, so that we might all become his children and therefore brothers and sisters to one another.  The Father’s love, embodied and revealed by Jesus in his liberating actions and preaching, enables us, in the Holy Spirit, to be a sign of a new humanity — no longer founded on selfishness and individualism, but on mutual love and solidarity.

The Gospel reading for this Fourth Sunday of Advent is the same as for this past Thursday, which elicited an earlier post on Joseph, Most Just. In Pope Francis’s Apostolic Letter Patris Corde, this passage elicits reflection on St. Joseph’s obedience:

Joseph was deeply troubled by Mary’s mysterious pregnancy. He did not want to “expose her to public disgrace”, so he decided to “dismiss her quietly” (Mt 1:19).

In the first dream, an angel helps him resolve his grave dilemma: “Do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife, for the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Mt 1:20-21). Joseph’s response was immediate: “When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him” (Mt 1:24). Obedience made it possible for him to surmount his difficulties and spare Mary.