A hasty oath and submission to the public. Herod’s image of a politician who rejects the voice of conscience

The Biblical image of the martyrdom of St. John the Baptist shows the drama of Herod, who first hastily took an oath and then passed judgement on the innocent John the Baptist. His mistakes are besides repeated by today's politicians, who, although frequently aware of what to do, deliberately choose evil in fear of public opinion. Thus, alternatively of being good rulers, they become “ poll hostages”.

Herod's first mistake was to take an oath in the substance of triviality. For the oath is the call of God himself to witness on a very crucial issue. For example, married couples in the presence of God make to themselves I swear The recently elected president makes I swear To God, he will work for the good of the nation. What did Herod do?

When the daughter... Herodias came in and danced, Herod and her fellow guests liked her. The king said to the girl, «Ask me what you want and I will give you». He even swore to her: «I will give you whatever you ask, even half my kingdom» (Mk 6.22-23).

Herod's oath did not apply important Things. Under the influence of the moment—perhaps engulfed in lust towards the girl—he utilized an oath due to the fact that the girl “liked him.” As St. Thomas of Aquinas points out, the oath made in a trivial substance is incorrect in itself.

The oath becomes the origin of evil for those who make it bad use, that is, for those who usage it without request and without due care. For if a man calls to God as a witness for a trivial reason, it seems that in this way he shows small respect for God, due to the fact that in this way he would not even treat a good man – read in Theological Summie (ST II-II q. 89 a. 2, c.).

We know how Herod's unwise oath ended: Herodias' daughter, for her mother's suggestion, asked for John the Baptist's head on a bowl. The king so ordered the executioner to beheaded John in prison, and brought his head. However, Dr. Angelski points out that the oath made hastily is devoid of discretion, and so it cannot be said in any way necessary (ibid., a. 3, c.). Moreover, if it concerns a bad thing, it is not only No needbut even not allowed Keep it.

If, on the another hand, the thing to which 1 has committed himself is in his power, but should not be done--whether it is due to the fact that he is inherently evil or due to the fact that he is an obstacle to the good--then his oath is without justice. Therefore, an oath must not be kept if it involves sin or an obstacle to good. – explains Akwinata (ibid., a. 7, c.).

Herod, seeing what his hastily spoken words to Herodias' daughter led to, not only was he not obliged to kill the prophet, but he even had a moral work to disagree. However, as St. Mark says, "for the sake of his oath and his guests he refused to deny it" (Mk 6:26).

In the life of John the Baptizer Herod enjoyed listening to him and was besides afraid of him. The fact preached by the prophet, on the 1 hand, fascinated him, and on the another hand, terrified him. Herod was aware of John’s holiness, but his presence caused any anxiety. This was most likely due to the fact that Herod lived with his brother’s wife; specified a relation was forbidden by law, and John reminded the king like a conscience.

Herod is simply a classical example of a policy that, although he knows what he should do, is afraid of public opinion. The girl's request caused anxiety to his conscience, but he stifled him by fearing judgement from fellow guests. His decision is so much more tragic, that although it is unfortunate not to see errors in his conduct, it is even worse to do evil knowingly. Today, too, many politicians compromise with God’s law and suppress their own conscience, allegedly taking care of the opinion of “all society”. On the 1 hand, they declare themselves Catholics and can frequently be seen at spiritual ceremonies; on the another hand, they vote for abortion, in vitro, or monogender unions – all of this from alleged concern for “unbiasedness” and “not imposing their own views”.

"I am private Catholic, but while serving as a public servant I cannot offend unbelievers" – specified absurd statements frequently fall out of the mouth of politicians who consider themselves Catholic. The problem is that there are no 2 separate politicians conscience – 1 to regulation and 1 to make private decisions. For man is an integral being, an integral being—and so in all decision he must strive towards good.

And this good should be sought by the rulers by appropriate exercise of their authority. The right authority, on the another hand, is the 1 who serves the common good, and is not enslaved by the fear of public opinion. This is referred to by the pastoral constitution “Gaudium et Spes” in the words: The political community exists (...) for the common good in which it finds full justification and intent and from which it takes its first and appropriate right (No 74). The conditions that aid citizens accomplish their own excellence are common.

The exercise of political power, whether in the community as such, or in institutions representing the state, should always be done within the limits of moral order, for the common good... This clearly shows the responsibility, dignity and importance of those who rule – continues the council document.

The authorities should so be able to see citizens' welfare. The authority that fails to fulfil this condition neglects its primary task to which it was appointed. The rulers must not be ‘ poll hostages’ matching their decisions with the public. The common good does not depend on opinionsbut it's a value that surpasses it. For example, taking an innocent person's life is always incorrect and always contradicts the well-being of a man. Whatever society thinks about it.

Returning to Herod's dramatic story, he was willing to take the life of an innocent man, just to delight fellow guests. It is so hard to call his decision an action for the benefit of citizens to aid them accomplish excellence. At most, it was an action for the peace of the unrighteous relation of Herodias, which John the Baptist, like the voice of conscience, pointed to by sin.

Adrian Fyda