Editor’s Note: Boston College convened a conference on March 12-13, 2026, on the Rule of Law and the Common Good. A Faith That Does Justice Vice-President Rev. Thomas Massaro, SJ, was one of the distinguished presenters – scholars, lawyers, theologians, writers – from around the world. The following essay has been adapted from his presentation.

Those of us in the habit of praying the Biblical psalter return again and again to Psalm 119. One section of this, the longest of all the psalms, contains these five phrases: “How I love your law, O Lord” and “your command is ever with me” and “your decrees are my meditation” and “through your precepts I gain discernment” and “from your ordinances I turn not away” (all found in verses 97-104). Those five key nouns again are: law, command, decrees, precepts and ordinances. And the key sentiments are those of deep appreciation, admiration, devotion, even love for God’s law.

Now, how might such reverence for divine law carry over to respect for civil law?

Mustering up some devotion and commitment to good secular law is a noble endeavor. Civil laws and statutory codes are indispensable bedrocks of our way of life, so they are indeed worthy of our loyalty, even reverence, if not actual love. Respecting and adhering to constitutions and civil statutes is a commendable virtue. Ignoring, violating , and flouting them is a serious vice.

The problem, of course, is that the instruments of our rule of law are not universally hallowed or even respected at this particular moment in our national history. We have a current Federal Administration that is callous, dismissive of precepts and legal customs it finds inconvenient, and thus frequently flouts the textual specifications of the U.S. Constitution as well as the received norms associated with it.  As we witness fierce assaults upon the rule of law these days, many of us stand by in shock at such blatant disregard for the rule of law in general and of specific laws and legal norms on many occasions.

Put simply, public affairs are simply not proceeding ;on a basis that is sustainable and reconcilable with democratic norms. With the weaponization of presidential power of many sorts, we are witnessing massive violations of a shared ethical compact, a consensus around rules-based democratic ways of proceeding in public life, that has been so easy to take for granted in previous eras with previous presidents.

Any observant person’s litany of such violations would include the misuse of executive power in issuing arbitrary pardons, bypassing or even erasing much of the Congressional authority mandated by the Constitution, usurping many prerogatives of the states, and ignoring court orders time and again.

In very serious matters—from immigration enforcement to tariff policy to the timely release of previously approved federal spending to authorization for the use of force abroad—the current administration has demonstrated a stupefying lack of respect for the rule of law.

It would make the author of Psalm 119 blush or turn over in the grave.

Further, I have to keep reminding myself of the distinction between actual violations of the rule of law on one hand and a range of other objectionable features of the current administration on the other hand – from wanton cruelty to swaggering vulgarity to blatant cronyism to techniques of intimidation, relentless self-promotion, attention hogging, and strategic distraction. Not all of the latter are technically violations of the rule of law, but the style by which one exercises governmental power is ultimately of a piece with the substance and legality of administrative measures and policies.

My diagnosis is that as a nation, we have contracted a very debilitating case of Rule of Law Dysphoria, with the result that the common good is withering away under the rapidly metastasizing cancer cells of division, polarization, cruelty, insult, intolerance, demonization, and deception.

What then is the prescription?  What is to be done?

At the start of this Reflection, I listed key Rule of Law nouns. Now, I recommend this collection of verbs and verbal phrases to anyone in search of guidance in deciding on a course of action: resist, challenge, push back, denounce, mobilize, get involved, even “box them in.” Follow the crime-fighting slogan ubiquitous in public service announcements: “If you see something, say something.” Don’t allow violations of law and legal norms to go unnoticed and thereby unchallenged. Sunlight is indeed the best disinfectant.

Next, after the initial exposure, join your own personal efforts to those of many others by networking and organizing effective coalitions of opposition to abuses. We have already witnessed an impressive series of massive nationwide efforts from the “No Kings” rallies to the tragic loss of life of two innocent protesters, Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti, in Minneapolis, a poignant reminder of the perennial reality that a high price has to be paid for such prophetic acts of witness.

There are many creative ways of exposing abuses, expressing outrage and creating conditions for change. Social activist Gene Sharp once listed about two hundred “methods of nonviolent action,” clever techniques for contributing to social reform. All of them are peaceful in nature, with some being downright hilarious, in the categories of satire and targeted mockery.

The word “prophetic” leads to the crucial question: What is the distinctive contribution of specifically religious voices to the struggle to uphold the rule of law?

By no means are we starting from scratch here. Ever since the prophet Nathan confronted King David and his misdeeds in 2 Samuel chapter 12, we have witnessed a long and impressive tradition of prophets calling down divine judgment upon despots, of speaking truth to power, of responses (carefully calibrated or not) on the part of religious voices and faith communities to governmental abuses and encroaching authoritarianism. If you are wondering if such prophetic denunciation and opposition is ever effective, just ask Ferdinand Marcos, Robert Mugabe, or the oppressive leaders of late Cold War Poland, late apartheid-era South Africa, or any number of deposed despots whose abuses sparked reform movements spearheaded by religious leaders.

Yet even as we look at our faith traditions to guide, we must be ever on guard. The possibility always exists that religion may find itself “being used” for partisan political purposes, captured by political forces and co-opted in cynical ways that cause faith-based activism to lose its bearings and compromise its message. The ongoing debate over the phenomenon of Christian nationalism has once again brought to the surface the many risks to the integral, honest interpretation of the gospel message. Indeed, red flags still abound regarding the instrumental use of religion to divide the populace rather than unite people of goodwill by appeals to conscience and in service of the common good.

The best way to prevent religion from being corrupted for partisan purposes is for religious leaders to keep the focus on the invocation of absolute moral truths and ethical principles and the workings of a well-formed conscience—all of which are squarely in the wheelhouse of religion in the first place.

In its consistent appeal to “the better angels of our nature,” religious ethical thought has a felicitous way of filling the moral vacuums we might encounter with departures from the rule of law, because it is capable of proposing appealing moral visions that tap into the deepest longing of people for moral order in the universe. It stands up for decency and moral behavior that must be practiced universally by all parties, even the most powerful, especially the top officials of any government to whom citizens have extended a sacred trust.

And if this all sounds a bit too abstract for full comfort, recall that the ethical guidance offered by religion is eminently concrete, with core messages regarding care for the poor and the outcast, extending a hand of assistance to refugees and other marginalized peoples. These acts of mercy and justice are full expressions of prayerful faith, not planks of some polarizing agenda. Such compassionate actions do not need to be sold as anything except divine directives for a religious mission to communicate God’s love for all people, without exception, in line with their innate human dignity.

At the outset, I posited that respect for the civil law displays a certain affinity with religious devotion. Recall again the words of Psalm 109, “How I love your law, O Lord.” Religious devotion fills a gap in our political culture that nothing else can. Indeed, if a renewal in adherence to the rule of law is to come, a good place to start might be with the call of Pope Francis for “a better kind of politics,” one oriented to the common good.

Thomas Massaro, SJ, is a member of the USA East Province of Jesuits. He is the Laurence J. McGinley Endowed Chair in Religion and Society and Professor of Moral Theology at Fordham University, New York. Father Massaro is a Director and Board Vice President of A Faith That Does Justice.