ADVOCATE: A REVOLUTION IN LAW

Pontius Pilate was sympathetic towards Jesus. His wife also urged him to do nothing bad to that “righteous man.” Why didn’t Pilate ask Jesus to get an advocate? Well, at that time, Roman law did not provide for an advocate.

Thirty years later, by the time of Paul’s trial, the accusers had a “spokes- person,” Tertullus. The accused, however, had to defend himself. Later, Roman law allowed a relative or a friend to defend an accused. The defender, however, was not allowed to charge a fee. If he really believed that the accused was innocent, he needed to defend him pro bono.

The term advocatus as an officer of a court of law first appears in Bishop’s courts around twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The institution was born when law graduates from universities such as Bologna started helping bish- ops to base their judgements on the “Roman” law. The experts, however, gave conflicting suggestions. Two lawyers may point to different sections of the same code, the first favoring one party; the second the opposite party.

Judges therefore began to require legal experts to take an oath in the name of God with one hand on the Bible. They pledged that they would serve God and justice; that they would assist the bishop in making a just decision, in accordance with the law. Taking this solemn oath institutionalized the profession of the Advocate.

THE CRAZY IDEA OF THE ADVOCATE

Imagine a modern university student. He thinks university was invented for wild partying … so his girlfriend leaves him. He gets deeper into drugs and debts, so his friends stop lending to him. His professor fails him. Frustrated and angry, he picks up an automatic rifle and breaks into his classroom on a shooting spree.

Students hide behind desks and film the carnage. Some live-stream the tragedy. A news channel starts broadcasting the Breaking News until he runs out of ammunition. Thousands of viewers watch him killing and getting arrested.

The student is charged with multiple murders. He has no money to hire a lawyer. So, what will happen?

The court has to give him an advocate. Taxpayers, including the families of the murdered professor and students, have to pay the lawyer to defend the murderer.

The case is foolproof. Yet a smart, handsome, self-confident young advocate agrees to defend him pro bono. He knows that the TV will make him a national hero.

Imagine! The cool and brilliant advocate researches well. He brings in top experts on mental health as his witnesses. He uses the ex-girlfriend to move the jury’s emotions. The accused is acquitted.

What happens next?

Every mafia boss wants to hire that advocate. He becomes a wealthy and famous speaker, writer, and philanthropist. He runs for the governorship of his state and wins. His friends want him to run for president!

Can a smooth talker devote his life to defend criminals and become the president of his nation?

How did the West develop such a crazy legal system?

Well, you can blame Jesus. The Bible says that he is a sinner’s advocate: “if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.”

Whom does Jesus save?
The law-breaker.
Does he care for the law?
Of course, he does. It is his law. He is also the ultimate judge. So, why does he defend the lawbreaker?

Because the lawbreaker is God’s child. Jesus takes the sinner’s punishment upon himself. He died for us. There is another key difference between Jesus and the advocate portrayed above. Jesus saves sinners in order to reform them. In order to be saved, a sinner has to confess his sin and repent. He has to ask the Savior to give him a new heart and a “new birth.” He has to become a member of Christ’s body, his Church and live under its teaching and authority.

In our story, the advocate was serving himself, not God, not justice, not the judge, nor society. He was serving money, not God. By separating his profession from its historic roots and moral base, his culture has corrupted his institution. This factor makes it easier to understand the role the Church played in shaping the West’s uniquely moral–legal culture.

“DUTIES OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION”

The “crazy” institution of the advocate, who is paid to defend the guilty, worked in the West only because through the church and the pulpit, the Bible produced legal professionals and witnesses with character.

In England, for example, Rev. Thomas Gisborne codified the “Duties of Legal Profession” in his massive two-volume work, An Enquiry into the Duties of Men in the Higher and Middle Classes of Society in Great Britain, Resulting from their Respective Stations, Professions, and Employments.  Gisborne begins the discussion of the duties of advocates with the tension between a professional’s moral duty to God and society, and his legal/ professional responsibility towards his client. This section cannot go into the details of Gisborne’s long chapter. The important point is that Gisborne placed the responsibility upon Bible teachers and pastors to equip legal professionals with the wisdom they need to resolve the ethical dilemmas they face every day. If they are to serve justice, their character formation is as important as their legal education and skills.

What if advocates work only for money? In such cultures, the system has to break down sooner or later. No society can go on respecting professionals who defend crime and injustice.

A non-barbaric judicial system can deliver justice only if every generation of citizens is equipped with a truth-telling, trustworthy character.

Gisborne recognized that this fundamental role was played by churches that faithfully and reverently taught the Bible.

From around the twelfth century, British courts required witnesses to place their hand on the Bible to take the oath, “I swear by Almighty God [to tell] the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” This is because God himself commanded, “You shall not bear false witness.” Traditionally, after swearing to tell the truth, witnesses bowed to kiss the Bible. Some devout Christians objected to this oath on the ground that the Lord Jesus commanded them to be so truthful that swearing becomes unnecessary. The courts respected their conscience and gave them the liberty to solemnly affirm that they will tell the truth. During the last century or so, atheists took advantage of affirming their commitment to tell the truth, without having to swear on the Bible.

In 2013, Ian Abrahams, a magistrate in Bristol, brought a formal proposal before the Magistrates Association to end this practice of requiring people to swear on the Bible. According to the BBC news, the Association, which represents a third of the UK’s 23,000 magistrates, debated the proposal in its meeting in Cardiff and voted against it. They affirmed that the British legal system depends upon the Bible and the character that it used to create, and continues to create, in Anglo-Saxon cultures.

DID THE BIBLE CHANGE LAW?

Jesus’ trial and crucifixion changed our world. It is well known that his death put an end to animal sacrifice. For he was seen as the Lamb of God who took the sin of the world upon himself. Even more important is the fact that Jesus was crucified even though the judge had found him to be innocent before sentencing him to death. That began to be perceived as the “justice” of Satan’s kingdom. Therefore, Europe succeeded in building up a justice system that assumes that an accused is innocent until he is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Other cultures had tried it, but failed.

A law which is rooted in universal morality

A law that is binding upon all rulers everywhere, and yet

A law that gives to nations, institutions, and citizens the authority to make their own rules.

CONCLUSION

Rule of law results in freedom. Law began to rule over rulers only because the church councils affirmed Peter’s confession that “Jesus is Christ”: He is God’s anointed ruler over the kings of the earth.

Historians hide history because intellectuals hate it. They want us to believe that their philosophies prevented rulers from abusing their powers. The reality is that so far no one has found an alternative to the Bible.

God’s word is a double-edged sword. It liberates us from the tyranny of rulers and from the corruption of our own hearts. Therefore, it is able to regulate human communities without rulers having to police our individual liberties.