Conferences on the Virtues
By Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, ocd
Number 66
Taxes are Binding in
Conscience…
We ended up
last time with the requisites for taxes to be just, now we go on to consider
Thesis: In general, by their Very Nature, Taxes are
Binding in Conscience, Once the Individual Citizen’s just share has been
determined.
In
general and by their very nature:
That is because
civil legislators do have the authority to oblige in conscience in matters of
grave importance for the common good.
As you know,
when the performance of an act obliges in conscience, failure to do so
constitutes a sin in the truest sense of the word.
However, civil
legislators seldom oblige in conscience, they merely attach penalties,
such as fines and imprisonment for violations.
With regard to income tax violations, we all know how severe those
penalties can be.
Once
the individual citizen’s just share has been determined:
This determines
the moment when the obligation to pay the tax arises.
In many
counties it is the civil authority, which calculates all the tax liabilities
imposed upon the citizenry.
Here in the
United States only the determination of the income tax requires that the
citizen assume responsibility for calculating his share.
In this
instance, the obligation to pay is preceded by the obligation to declare income
and calculate what the fair share is going to be.
You may have
wondered why the principle stated above is called a Thesis. The reason is, simply, that not everyone is
convinced that payment of taxes can oblige in conscience. Thus the author of my textbook is
constrained to prove it on several grounds:
1. The
authority of Sacred Scripture:
a. Implicitly,
from the words and example of Jesus Himself, who instructed Peter to pay the
Temple Tax for the two of them (Matt 17:23-26); and from His response to the
Pharisees and Herodians who had asked Him if it were lawful to pay tribute
(that is, taxes) to Caesar: Render
to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s (Matt.
22:21)
b. Explicitly,
from the doctrine of the Apostle Paul: Thou
must needs, then, be submissive, not only for fear of punishment, but in
conscience. It is for this same reason
that you pay taxes; magistrates are in God’s service, and must give all their
time to it. Pay every man, then, his
due; taxes, if it be taxes, customs, if it be customs…(Romans 13:5-7).
2. From
the common teaching of moralists at all times.
3. From
Reason: Citizens are bound in
conscience to provide what is necessary for the administration and protection
of their society, from which they draw numerous benefits, such as good order,
security in their persons and properties, and protection against enemies from
within and without, among others.
Thus
the obligation to pay taxes is binding in conscience.
Although
moralists unanimously agree that, in general, the obligation to pay taxes is
binding in conscience, there is also some dispute among them as to whether this
is true in concrete cases.
Those who say
it does not bind in conscience in all particular cases base their opinion upon
the assertion that tax laws oblige under penalty alone. The author of my textbook is of the opinion
that this is indeed true in the English-speaking world.
Then the
question arises, what virtue is the proximate source of the obligation
to pay taxes?
Where the
obligation does not bind in conscience, the source is legal justice and obedience. These virtues are said to be the sources in
the sense that not to pay ones fair share of taxes would constitute a sin
against legal justice and of disobedience to lawful authority.
In those
countries where the legislators intend to bind the citizenry in conscience to
the payment of their fair share of taxes, the source is said to be commutative
justice. That is because the
citizens are deemed to enter into an implicit contract with one another
and with the civil authority, namely, that each would do his fair share in
paying the cost of promoting the common good.
Here the question of obedience does not enter in because the parties to
the implicit contract are not superiors and subjects, but peers.
But even in
those countries where the obligation to pay taxes is binding in conscience,
there are moralists who say that there is no such thing as an implicit contract
entered into by the citizenry with one another, so that the source of the
obligation is directly and immediately legal justice and obedience. Above, these sources were indirect and
mediate because the tax laws were binding under pain of penalty only.
What is a
confessor to say to a penitent who has confessed that he has cheated on his
taxes?
Although there
remains an obligation to make up the difference between what he has actually
paid and what he knows he should have paid, the manner in which to do so
could present a problem. If the
delinquent were to identify himself to the IRS, he could find himself in deep
trouble with penalties and interest.
Thus it would seem that the best thing to do would be to make an anonymous
payment of the amount unlawfully withheld.
What if a
penitent asks his confessor whether he is bound in conscience to pay taxes?
The confessor
would have to exhort him to pay his fair share because it is the upright and
honorable thing to do, in accordance with the accepted interpretation of the
tax laws, as a matter of at least legal justice and obedience.
Article
II – The Obligation to Serve in the Military…
In some foreign
countries all young men are obliged to serve a stated number of years in the
Military. Where that is the case, the
obligation is considered to be a personal tax-type burden.
Thus what has
been said above about ordinary taxes would be applicable here. That would be especially true where serving
in the Military Service does not involve the going to war, but rather
performing certain kinds of Police Service and other types of public works,
such as conservation, for the good of the entire country.
Therefore, it
would be a sin to disobedience and a violation of legal justice for one obliged
to enter the Military to
1. Use
unlawful means to obtain an exemption, such as to inflict a disability upon
himself, to tell lies, or to bribe doctors or military officials.
2. To
be a deserter.
In countries
such as ours, where the Military Service is entirely voluntary (except in
war-time), to be a deserter would be a violation of commutative justice only,
because of the contract made with the rest of the citizenry to serve in
that capacity.
In wartime, a
special difficulty is presented to the authorities by conscientious
objectors.
A conscientious
objector is one who on Religious or quasi-religious grounds has the good-faith
conviction that it is immoral to serve in a Military Organization.
Such a person
is either a pacifist or is convinced that the war his country is engaged
in is not a just war.
In principle,
such persons are granted exemption. The
special difficulty lies in discerning which of the alleged conscientious
objectors are claiming an exemption in good faith.
Question
4 – Public Judgments…
A public
judgment is formally and primarily an act of distributive Justice whereby a
Judge accords to the parties involved a protection and a safeguard in proportion
to the quantity and the quality of their respective rights.
Were the Judge
to accord a protection that does not so accord, that would be acceptance of
persons, and would result in a corrupt judgment.
My author
observes: Although by reason of its
purpose or objective a public judgment pertains to legal Justice (because it is
exercised in view of the Common Good), by reason of the matter at issue it
could also be an act of Commutative Justice (insofar as it is directed to the
protection and vindication of a strict right in individuals).
By reason of
its form, however, it is an act of Distributive Justice.
Hence, St.
Thomas: A Judgment can be considered
in two ways.
One, in regard
to the very matter to be decided, and in this way usually has to do with
Commutative and Distributive Justice.
A Judgment may
be defined with regard to how something held in common is to be distributed,
and with regard to how one party is to restore to another what he has taken
from him.
The other, in
regard to the very form of the Judgment.
Even in a matter of Commutative Justice, insofar as the Judge takes from
one individual and gives to another, it pertains to Distributive Justice.
Accordingly, in
every Judgment, there is always the possibility that acceptance of persons may
hold sway.
Article
I – Judges…
The
Office and the Qualities of a Judge
A Judge is a
public person constituted by lawful authority for the purpose of authentically
deciding and defining rights.
The mere making
and promulgation of laws does not suffice to bring about the common good. It is necessary that they be diligently and
faithfully observed.
In order that
the laws be observed there must exist a judicial power to resolve disputes that
arise between individuals concerning their respective rights. That power is also necessary for the purpose
of punishing violators of the law.
In the former,
the judicial power is said to be civil or commercial in
nature. In the latter, it is said to be
criminal or correctional.
Every Judge
must be endowed with three qualities: Jurisdiction,
Competence, and Integrity.
Jurisdiction
is the right or power over both the subject matter at issue and the parties to
the dispute.
It entitles the
judge to decide the matter on behalf of the society, and to impose the decision
or judgment upon the parties.
In other words,
it is jurisdiction, which makes the judgment valid and gives it the
force of law.
St. Thomas has
this to say about the effects of jurisdiction:
The
sentence (judgment) of the judge is like a particular law dealing with
particular facts.
Just as a
general law must be endowed with coercive force, so also must the sentence of a
Judge enjoy the power to coerce the parties to a dispute?
Without it, the
judgment could not take effect.
Only those are
endowed with coercive power in human affairs who exercise public authority on
behalf of the state, which makes them the lawful superiors over those who have
recourse to them.
Such power and
authority can be ordinary, in the sense that it goes with a public
office, or it may be by commission, i.e., conferred by the one who holds
the highest public authority.
Competence
means possessing the necessary knowledge to make a just or equitable decision
in the matter at issue.
Some observations:
1.
In order to be competent, the judge needs most
of all to have the virtue of jurisprudence.
It
does not require that he know all the laws of the place by heart, but rather
that he be able to interpret the laws according to the highest judicial
principles and apply them to the case at hand.
2. For
the more difficult cases submitted to him, jurisprudence requires that the
judge shore up his competence by consultation and research.
3. Whoever
accepts the office of Judge without the requisite knowledge commits, in
effect, a sin by violating Legal Justice, and in effect commits a
violation of Commutative Justice, since he would be at least vaguely aware that
he is going to harm the private parties to the disputes brought before him.
4. A
Judge is required to use ordinary diligence in order to gain a comprehensive
grasp of the particular matter he is to decide. This necessarily includes listening carefully to the opposing
parties, as to the facts; and to the arguments presented by their respective
attorneys, as to the law.
To
help us understand how important this attribute of competence is, let us listen
to the author of my textbook advising confessors:
a. A
Judge who is lacking the required competence cannot be absolved [of sins
against legal and commutative justice] unless he
(1) Resigns
his office or
(2) Abstains
from functioning until he has been able to acquire it, or
(3) Seeks
the counsel of persons who are competent, if he is unable to abstain from
functioning
b. A
Judge, who culpably has done harm to a party, whether because of lack of competence
or because of negligence, is bound in conscience to repair the damage.
c. A
Judge who through inadvertence or non-culpable negligence has caused harm to a
party is obliged, if not gravely inconvenient, to communicate that fact to the
injured party, and to, either advise that party to seek a review, or to certify
the matter himself for review, by a higher court.
Integrity
or incorruptibility ought to be the most distinctive mark of
a Judge.
That is to say,
he must be so disposed in heart and soul and mind as to yield neither to love
nor hate, bribes nor threats, blandishments nor pressure, convenience nor
inconvenience, but solely to the norms of true justice and to the good faith
dictates of his conscience.
Thus it would
be sinful for a Judge to
a. Favor
one party or the other during the judicial process, e.g., by indicating to one
of the attorneys what to do to win the case.
b. Accept
gifts in money or in kind from either of the parties. This seems always to have the effect of inclining him to favor the
donor party.
(As
an aside: Would this preclude a judge,
who has in hand a check in the amount of $15,000.00 from the Plaintiff and a
check in the amount of $25,000 from the defendant, from giving back $10,000 to
the Defendant and judging the case strictly on the merits???)
Though
it may not be sinful, it would be very imprudent for a Judge to accept a
gift in money or in kind after a case has been honestly and justly
decided from the winning party, because of the suspicion it would generate of
some kind of collusion.
The
Duties of a Judge…
A Judge is to
hear a case according to the order and form prescribed in the Laws governing
judicial proceedings, and is to decide it according to the knowledge he has
gained while sitting as Judge.
He does not make
the laws, but is their interpreter.
He acts, not as
a private person, who delivers a private opinion, but as a public person with
the public knowledge he has acquired during the public proceeding.
Therefore, he
(i) must judge on the basis of what has been alleged and proven (ii) cannot
abstain from reaching a decision (iii) decide on a case by case basis.
* * * * * * * * *
MISSION STATEMENT: This web site was created for the purpose of completing the work of Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, O.C.D These conferences may be reproduced for private use only. Publication of this material is forbidden without permission of the Father Provincial for the Discalced Carmelites, Holy Hill, 1525 Carmel Rd., Hubertus, WI 53033-9770.