From the article, we read the following. Does the text really match the heading or the interpretation put on it in the article?
- The role of conscience is paramount in moral decision making. (The magazine heading)
The Pope actually said:
“Individual conscience needs to be better incorporated into the church’s practice in certain situations which do not objectively embody our understanding of marriage”
Then the magazine article goes on to interpret Pope Francis’ statement thus:
“That is the traditional belief that individual conscience is the final arbiter of the moral life has been forgotten here. The church has been “called to form consciences, not to replace them” (37). Yes, it is true, the Pope says, that a conscience needs to be formed by church teaching. But conscience does more than to judge what does or does not agree with church teaching. Conscience can also recognize with “a certain moral security” what God is asking (303). Pastors, therefore, need to help people not simply follow rules, but to practice “discernment,” a word that implies prayerful decision making.” (The magazine article itself again)
I am not persuaded that the Church actually teaches that “conscience is paramount” or that “individual conscience is the final arbiter of the moral life”. The Catechism doesn’t put it that way, as I read it. There is quite a bit in the Catechism about conscience and its importance, but it also says:
‘1799 Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.’
-and-
"1801 Conscience can remain in ignorance or make erroneous judgments. Such ignorance and errors are not always free of guilt. "
So, it seems to me asserting that individual conscience is “paramount” or “the final arbiter of the moral life” is not quite consistent with the Catechism or what the Pope actually said, either one. While the Church’s teachings on conscience are subtle and nuanced, saying conscience is the “final arbiter” of the “moral life” is closer to the protestant view of the autonomy of conscience than the Catholic view that the prompting of conscience can be flawed and must be guided by the clear teachings of the Church.
It certainly seems to me if there is a very clear moral teaching of the Church; e.g., that voluntary abortion is intrinsically wrong; that is, wrong in itself and every time, then it does not seem to me a conscience that tells one it’s okay to do it, for example, because one feels “burdened with a baby”, and feels that’s justification enough, despite knowledge of the Church’s teaching, can possibly be the proper “final arbiter” of the moral choice to abort or to not abort.
Granted, a protestant or a Jew might have received other moral teaching from his religion about voluntary abortion, and might, because of the way it’s so “sanitized” in this society, might not receive the messages of natural law about it. I get that. But a Catholic who knows the Church’s teaching?
I have a lot of trouble with this article’s interpretation of the Pope’s statement.
Right, how many Catholic marriages are joined by God, and not just two people getting married for other reasons as you stated in post #11. I would think the marriages in the Church where God is not really wanted by the bride and groom (I know of some) would not really be valid.