Conscience question

  • Thread starter Thread starter LaSainte
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LaSainte has told us why she feels trapped, and it’s not because she is expected to uphold teachings based on her beliefs. But LaSainte can answer that better than anyone.
Why do you start a thread on conscience and post a clip from the Catechism that says "to not follow your conscience would be to condemn yourself "? Church teaching and your conscience are not separate. She is only compelled to follow Church teaching because her conscience tells her too. She is also being compelled to believe contraception is not wrong in all cases by her conscience.

Also here is one of her posts:
But it is a LOT harder for someone who is not Catholic to commit a mortal sin, which is honestly why I sometimes wish I wasn’t raised catholic. Killing someone is of course a no-brainer. But even murderers who aren’t catholic can just pray for forgiveness and be forgiven because they don’t know about confession, so they get a pass. But when it comes to trickier thing like contraception, which is supposedly a matter of “natural law” as well, they get a pass for that too, because they honestly can’t be expected to know it is “evil”. I don’t know one person who isn’t catholic who honestly thinks contraception is evil based on natural law, but everyone intrinsically knows that murder is wrong. Actually, I don’t know and Catholics in real life who think it is wrong either-just scaredy cats like me who are too afraid of hell to go against the church.
hmm… was I really so far off the mark as you seem to think?
 
When you have a frown on your face, and someone asks you what is wrong do you chastise them for presuming about how you felt?
This is not what you did. What you did is equivalent to seeing a frown on someone’s face, and then going off and telling someone else that the person is frowning because of XXX reason, even though that person never told you why they were frowning.
 
So the bottom line is: conscience is worthless and doesn’t matter at all. Whenever. We are faced with a moral dilemma that has not been clearly pronounced upon by the Church, we need only ask ourselves “What would the Church tell me to do?” and just do that.

Except that’s not what the catechism says. The catechism says that God speaks directly to us through our conscience, that conscience is sacred, and that although it can sometimes. E erroneous, we condemn ourselves if we do not follow it.
Our responsibility to to form our conscience
so that it will accept, support and follow Church teachings.

Look to conform yourself, not to find an exception just for you.
 
Why do you start a thread on conscience and post a clip from the Catechism that says "to not follow your conscience would be to condemn yourself "? Church teaching and your conscience are not separate. She is only compelled to follow Church teaching because her conscience tells her too. She is also being compelled to believe contraception is not wrong in all cases by her conscience.
Only LaSainte can answer why she started the thread. Church teaching and my conscience are separate, but I don’t speak for anyone else. Nor do I answer to anyone else. Only LaSainte can answer shy she feels compelled to follow Church teaching, and what she thinks about the Church’s teaching on contraception…though, I think I’v read several times, by her own type, what she feels about the Church’s teaching on contraception…
 
This is not what you did. What you did is equivalent to seeing a frown on someone’s face, and then going off and telling someone else that the person is frowning because of XXX reason, even though that person never told you why they were frowning.
But it is a LOT harder for someone who is not Catholic to commit a mortal sin, which is honestly why I sometimes wish I wasn’t raised catholic. Killing someone is of course a no-brainer. But even murderers who aren’t catholic can just pray for forgiveness and be forgiven because they don’t know about confession, so they get a pass. But when it comes to trickier thing like contraception, which is supposedly a matter of “natural law” as well, they get a pass for that too, because they honestly can’t be expected to know it is “evil”. I don’t know one person who isn’t catholic who honestly thinks contraception is evil based on natural law, but everyone intrinsically knows that murder is wrong. Actually, I don’t know and Catholics in real life who think it is wrong either-just scaredy cats like me who are too afraid of hell to go against the church.
I posted this quote from LeSainte above, but please tell me again how I am misjudging the situation? Any post on this thread is directed to everyone who is part of it. And yes I have real basis for my presumption.
 
hmm… was I really so far off the mark as you seem to think?
Yes. We seem to get different meanings out of reading the same exact, and pretty detailed, things. So you’ll have to restate those comments to LaSainte and get clarification from LaSainte. 🤷
 
Only LaSainte can answer why she started the thread. Church teaching and my conscience are separate, but I don’t speak for anyone else. Nor do I answer to anyone else. Only LaSainte can answer shy she feels compelled to follow Church teaching, and what she thinks about the Church’s teaching on contraception…though, I think I’v read several times, by her own type, what she feels about the Church’s teaching on contraception…
You answered to quick. See the post of hers I quoted.
 
I posted this quote from LeSainte above, but please tell me again how I am misjudging the situation? Any post on this thread is directed to everyone who is part of it. And yes I have real basis for my presumption.
Well then I guess LaSainte can confirm that “She feels trapped because she gained the knowledge of what the Church teaches on contraception and is now expected to uphold it based on her beliefs” when she comes back to the thread.
 
So then if I think subjectively that it would be a mortal sin to both withhold sex from my husband and to not use condoms, NFP and coitus interruptus for whatever reason, then what should I do (hypothetical-this is not the case with me)? If I follow my conscience, I am supposedly OBJECTIVELY committing a mortal sin. If I follow the Church, I am SUBJECTIVELY committing a mortal sin.

Damned if you do…etc.
NO ONE, not even you, can subjectively commit a
mortal sin by following the teachings of the Church.

It can NOT be done. It can NOT happen.
 
Conscience is not simply whatever you feel to be right: it is an intuitive apprehension of the good, and the adherence of the will to the pursuit of the good.

If you “feel” that that which is good is actually evil (and/or vice-versa), this is not conscience speaking – it is conscience *failing *to speak, because it is deadened by self-interest, unreason, ignorance, or whatever.

Hence why the Church says simultaneously (without contradicting itself) that you must obey your conscience AND that you must obey the teachings of the Church: you cannot do the former without doing the latter.
Bravo!
 
Yes. We seem to get different meanings out of reading the same exact, and pretty detailed, things. So you’ll have to restate those comments to LaSainte and get clarification from LaSainte. 🤷
The entire post was a complaint about knowing too much, which I can have empathy for but only because I have hit rock bottom before in my past. I’m sure you get a different meaning from it since you have only just jumped in on the thread after 6 other pages. Go back and read her first post and ask yourself what you think she was trying to justify to herself.
 
The entire post was a complaint about knowing too much, which I can have empathy for but only because I have hit rock bottom before in my past. I’m sure you get a different meaning from it since you have only just jumped in on the thread after 6 other pages. Go back and read her first post and ask yourself what you think she was trying to justify to herself.
Actually, it wasn’t a complaint about knowing too much. And I haven’t just jumped right in, I read them all.
 
Actually, it wasn’t a complaint about knowing too much. And I haven’t just jumped right in, I read them all.
Commendable. However your last three posts have been telling me what she didn’t mean. I presume that if your going to tell me she didn’t mean you must know what she meant? Otherwise you would do as Debora has and defer to LeSainte to tell us.
 
The entire post was a complaint about knowing too much, which I can have empathy for but only because I have hit rock bottom before in my past. I’m sure you get a different meaning from it since you have only just jumped in on the thread after 6 other pages. Go back and read her first post and ask yourself what you think she was trying to justify to herself.
I wouldn’t say she’s particularly “trying to justify” anything. Seems to me like she’s having a hard time reconciling the Church’s teaching on contraception with her conscience, and is seeing contradictory statements regarding conscience in Church doctrine. Seems to me like she’s more confused than anything else… but I guess she can explain herself better than you or I ever could. It’s best to just ask her for clarification.
 
I wouldn’t say she’s particularly “trying to justify” anything. Seems to me like she’s having a hard time reconciling the Church’s teaching on contraception with her conscience, and is seeing contradictory statements regarding conscience in Church doctrine. Seems to me like she’s more confused than anything else… but I guess she can explain herself better than you or I ever could. It’s best to just ask her for clarification.
Bookcat and I addressed this problem though. Its not a conflict between the Church and her conscience. Its a conflict within her conscience. Your conscience draws on all kinds of sources of information in order to make decisions including the Church as one of those sources. Your conscience then makes judgements based on whichever arguments or sources of information hold the most weight. At least up to this point the Church’s arguments have held the most sway for her conscience.

It seems we need to define conscience.

newadvent.org/cathen/04268a.htm
What conscience is in the soul of man?
It is often a good maxim not to mind for a time how a thing came to be, but to see what it actually is. To do so in regard to conscience before we take up the history of philosophy in its regard is wise policy, for it will give us some clear doctrine upon which to lay hold, while we travel through a region perplexed by much confusion of thought. The following points are cardinal:
Code:
The natural conscience is no distinct faculty, but the one intellect of a man inasmuch as it considers right and wrong in conduct, aided meanwhile by a good will, by the use of the emotions, by the practical experience of living, and by all external helps that are to the purpose.
The natural conscience of the Christian is known by him to act not alone, but under the enlightenment and the impulse derived from revelation and grace in a strictly supernatural order.
As to the order of nature, which does not exist but which might have existed, St. Thomas (I-II:109:3) teaches that both for the knowledge of God and for the knowledge of moral duty, men such as we are would require some assistance from God to make their knowledge sufficiently extensive, clear, constant, effective, and relatively adequate; and especially to put it within reach of those who are much engrossed with the cares of material life. It would be absurd to suppose that in the order of nature God could be debarred from any revelation of Himself, and would leave Himself to be searched for quite irresponsively.
Being a practical thing, conscience depends in large measure for its correctness upon the good use of it and on proper care taken to heed its deliverances, cultivate its powers, and frustrate its enemies.
Even where due diligence is employed conscience will err sometimes, but its inculpable mistakes will be admitted by God to be not blameworthy. These are so many principles needed to steady us as we tread some of the ways of ethical history, where pitfalls are many.
 
Commendable. However your last three posts have been telling me what she didn’t mean. I presume that if your going to tell me she didn’t mean you must know what she meant? Otherwise you would do as Debora has and defer to LeSainte to tell us.
LaSainte, correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t mean to speak for you, and if I’m wrong please correct me, it’s not my intention to assume what you mean, but this is what I get out of your posts from this thread: You feel trapped and constrained by the rules of the Church regarding contraception because they go against your conscience, and your conscience screams at you that the rules of the Church regarding contraception are harmful to married couples and cause people a lot of pain and suffering, you don’t believe the teaching is correct, and resent the teachings, the rationales and reasons for the teaching don’t make sense to you. You resent, and find offensive, being told to let the Church do the thinking for you and disregard what your conscience tells you because if your conscience isn’t in alignment with the Church, then it’s wrong. However, you were born and raised Catholic and the Catholic Church is home to you. You don’t believe that the Church is correct all the time, but it’s correct most of the time. This is one of the times you believe they are incorrect. You wish you never learned of these teachings, so that you wouldn’t feel burdened by them. And you wish you were never Catholic because you feel enslaved by the Church by emotional bonds and threats of eternal damnation due to your upbringing as a Catholic. But the horse has already been let out of the barn, and you were born into Catholicism. You suspect you’d be fine just ignoring the teachings, like most others do, but you don’t have the confidence to combat the fire and brimstone threats of the Church and would rather err on the side of caution, even if that means you were right all along. You haven’t found another religion yet that is like the Church but isn’t. And you wish they were more compassionate towards Catholics so that they wouldn’t burden them with unreasonable expectations and make their lives miserable. Please correct me if I have misunderstood you…
 
LaSainte, correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t mean to speak for you, and if I’m wrong please correct me, it’s not my intention to assume what you mean, but this is what I get out of your posts from this thread: You feel trapped and constrained by the rules of the Church regarding contraception because they go against your conscience, and your conscience screams at you that the rules of the Church regarding contraception are harmful to married couples and cause people a lot of pain and suffering, you don’t believe the teaching is correct, and resent the teachings, the rationales and reasons for the teaching don’t make sense to you. You resent, and find offensive, being told to let the Church do the thinking for you and disregard what your conscience tells you because if your conscience isn’t in alignment with the Church, then it’s wrong. However, you were born and raised Catholic and the Catholic Church is home to you. You don’t believe that the Church is correct all the time, but it’s correct most of the time. This is one of the times you believe they are incorrect. You wish you never learned of these teachings, so that you wouldn’t feel burdened by them. And you wish you were never Catholic because you feel enslaved by the Church by emotional bonds and threats of eternal damnation due to your upbringing as a Catholic. But the horse has already been let out of the barn, and you were born into Catholicism. You suspect you’d be fine just ignoring the teachings, like most others do, but you don’t have the confidence to combat the fire and brimstone threats of the Church and would rather err on the side of caution, even if that means you were right all along. You haven’t found another religion yet that is like the Church but isn’t. And you wish they were more compassionate towards Catholics so that they wouldn’t burden them with unreasonable expectations and make their lives miserable. Please correct me if I have misunderstood you…
I bet she will almost completely agree with what you have posted. You are making the same error she was originally though in assuming that the conflict is between the Church and her conscience, not within her conscience itself.
 
I bet she will almost completely agree with what you have posted. You are making the same error she was originally though in assuming that the conflict is between the Church and her conscience, not within her conscience itself.
To be more precise the issue is between one’s conscience and one’s understanding of Church’s teaching.
The one’s understanding of Church’s teaching can be wrong as well by itself.
 
I bet she will almost completely agree with what you have posted.
Yeah, I am betting she would agree with what I posted as my understanding of what her posts said. And they are very different from what you think her posts have said. But if I am incorrect, I hope she forgives me and corrects me because I’ve tried very hard to understand the messages she’s been trying to convey and acknolwedge them.
 
You are making the same error she was originally though in assuming that the conflict is between the Church and her conscience, not within her conscience itself.
So you think LaSainte is making incorrect assumptions about HERSELF? :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top