I don't understand what the church teaches about conscience?

[Pug]

The more you use your conscience, the more you use your intellect to weigh things and decide, the stronger conscience becomes. We were created for this freedom.

I tend to think that the prudent Catholic eventually makes far fewer decisions over time. Probably the same with the contract killer Catholic, just on a different set of tracks.

A prudent Catholic has made so many positive commitments that it doesn’t even occur to them to do certain things, so a decision isn’t needed.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

I think this is a good point. We do develop a list and then tend to follow it, decision-free. But that is hard to do when starting out as a from scratch Catholic.

The more you learn about the Catholic Church, the more you will see it’s based on common sense. [Read actual official documents, don’t listen to what people say.] This was an actual post on this site a while back: “Is it a sin to miss Mass on Sunday? I live in the mountains and ride a motorcyle. The church is 30 miles away and we just had a blizzard.” [actual post!!!] It shouldn’t take a rational person more than half a second to realize you should stay home and watch TV.

And of course no one is starting from scratch, whether you were an atheist, a Hindu, a Buddhist, or an Evangelical. We all share a common core of values. Many would say based on natural law. But that doesn’t really matter–the point is we all agree certain things are wrong and other things are virtuous.

The problems come in the case of Church laws (attend Mass, go to confession once a year, etc.) and in areas where there is disagreement among religions (is a fetus a human being? Is artificial contraception OK?). But in day-to-day terms, it’s not like you run into these situations constantly.

A prudent Catholic has made so many positive commitments that it doesn’t even occur to them to do certain things, so a decision isn’t needed.

Agreed–and that is the point of living a virtuous life. It gets easier and easier to make the right decisions.

I think a real danger–as you can often see in this forum–is ultra-scrupulous people who torture themselves over relatively trivial things. This is not how God wants you to live your life. You should be spending your energy thanking God for his many gifts, and not living in fear that you have inadvertently broken some rule.

 

[Pug]

The problems come in the case of Church laws (attend Mass, go to confession once a year, etc.)

This is very true, and is what I mean by a from scratch Catholic. I converted a long time ago and had no familiarity with how those types of rules worked. So some people are going to ask rather odd questions like the one you gave with the motorcycle and the blizzard. Some Catholics seem to take a bit of time finding the balance for “God loves me” and “Rules! Obey!”

You are so right, common sense is very helpful. If we see our peace evaporating, the we should suspect we have gone off path. Return to trust and love (God).

 

[Economist]

“And how will you react, when you finally have to face Our Lord? What will you say, what can you say, when He has to say to you, ‘Why did you not listen to my vicar Paul when he spoke to you? Get out of my sight, you worthless wretch!’ ”.

I can hardly wait to have that discussion. What a wonderful exchange of ideas it would be…

 

[HomeschoolDad]

“And how will you react, when you finally have to face Our Lord? What will you say, what can you say, when He has to say to you, ‘Why did you not listen to my vicar Paul when he spoke to you? Get out of my sight, you worthless wretch!’ ”.

Hope it works out well for you. Just remember that God is going to win any argument.

 

[Economist]

Hope it works out well for you. Just remember that God is going to win any argument.

That remains to be seen. There is no one who could stand up and declare: “God speaks through MY mouth”… well some people might attempt to do just that, but they do not qualify. No one qualifies. No individual and no establishment.

 

[Ender]

OTOH, if you simply do what someone else tells you to do, conscience is weakened. You are not taking responsibility for your actions.

This seems like a good basis to explain the difference in our understanding. Adhering to church doctrine is vastly different than “doing what someone else tells you to do.” It is quite reasonable to reject someone else’s opinion in favor of our own, but if we believe the church’s doctrines are merely the accumulated opinions of centuries of clerics then we should chuck it all and go fishing.

The church claims that her doctrines are not personal judgments which she has catalogued, but the word of God which she has received. If we don’t believe that, why are we Catholics, and if we do believe it then what is the problem with “doing what someone else tells you to do” if that person is God? Either we believe what the church teaches or we don’t, and both positions are rational. What is not rational is disbelieving the church yet remaining Catholic.

The knowledge which the Church offers to man has its origin not in any speculation of her own, however sublime, but in the word of God which she has received in faith. (Fides et ratio 7)

There is some value to deferring to the Church, but it still is not the freedom God has called us to. You will do the right thing, but it will not have the advantages that acting with a well formed conscience. You may even begin to be suspicious of every personal decision and deny the presence of God in our lives.

I am at a loss to understand this. You do the right thing but not from a well formed conscience? How can a well formed conscience lead you to do the wrong thing, and how can there be advantage in that?

…only the freedom which submits to the Truth leads the human person to his true good. (VS 84)

I get the impression you feel submitting to anything other than your conscience, even truth, is a denial of your freedom.

 

[Dovekin]

I get the impression you feel submitting to anything other than your conscience, even truth, is a denial of your freedom.

Yes indeed. Though I would say it is conscience that does the submitting.

Veritatis splendor addresses this:

VS 41. Man’s genuine moral autonomy in no way means the rejection but rather the acceptance of the moral law, of God’s command: “The Lord God gave this command to the man…” ( Gen 2:16). Human freedom and God’s law meet and are called to intersect, in the sense of man’s free obedience to God and of God’s completely gratuitous benevolence towards man. Hence obedience to God is not, as some would believe, a heteronomy, as if the moral life were subject to the will of something all-powerful, absolute, ex- traneous to man and intolerant of his freedom. If in fact a heteronomy of morality were to mean a denial of man’s self-determination or the imposition of norms unrelated to his good, this would be in contradiction to the Revelation of the Covenant and of the redemptive Incarnation. Such a heteronomy would be nothing but a form of alienation, contrary to divine wisdom and to the dignity of the human person.

Adopting an extraneous law, apart from the free judgement of conscience, is “a form of alienation.” Relying on another’s judgement, even if it is the Church’s centuries of wisdom, is denying one’s own ability to judge. OTOH, if you heed that wisdom and your judgement changes, you will not go aganst conscience. I object only to the assertion that one must do what an external authority demands when it conflicts with your conscience.

 

[JimG]

One must of course act on the basis of the judgment of one’s conscience. But conscience is not something external, having a direct line to the divine. It is a moral judgment of the intellect. If one finds that his conscience disagrees with the moral law revealed by God through the scripture and the Church established by Christ, the chance that conscience is incorrect is pretty high.

 

[Dovekin]

One must of course act on the basis of the judgment of one’s conscience. … It is a moral judgment of the intellect. If one finds that his conscience disagrees with the moral law revealed by God through the scripture and the Church established by Christ, the chance that conscience is incorrect is pretty high.

This is an excellent example of how conscience comes to a moral judgement through the use of intellect. Conscience should change its judgement to align with what is correct.

I have clipped from it “But conscience is not something external, having a direct line to the divine.” This does not really add to the analysis, and is arguably incorrect. God has written the moral law on our hearts, so in our “interior” we do have a direct line to God. As Gaudium et Spes says of this:

Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, Whose voice echoes in his depths.
Gaudium et Spes 16

 

[JimG]

So if every person’s conscience is a direct line to God, then every conscience should agree on the moral law. Is this what we find?

 

[Dovekin]

So if every person’s conscience is a direct line to God, then every conscience should agree on the moral law.

Why do you say that?

 

[JimG]

Because God does not contradict Himself.

 

[Dovekin]

Every one of us does contradict ourselves at times, misunderstands, can be illogical, etc.

 

[o_mlly]

Do we have a moral obligation and duty to form properly our conscience?

A properly formed conscience is 1) one that is subject to God’s will, 2) and one’s will subjected to one’s conscience, and 3) all the passions and body subjected to one’s will.

For some, this integration of takes a lifetime. For others, less so. But it cannot begin until we know God’s will. God’s will is known through prayer, Scripture and Sacred Tradition, these sources inform our conscience.

Our affections drive our attitudes and our attitudes drive our behaviors. Affections are dispositions of the heart. Stronger than passions which are more fleeting and volatile, our affections are grounded in our experience and past choices. Only when our affections are properly ordered can we expect to behave according to His will.