Is going against a malformed conscience a sin?

[LeafByNiggle]

Every example would very likely be clearly seen by us who have well formed consciences at quite obvious…but this would not take away from the possibility that the Church in fact sees here.

That is a poor excuse for not citing an example. Even a person with a well-formed conscience can nevertheless still imagine what a malformed conscience might be like. And it is not as if there is such a shortage of malformed consciences in this world that no real example can be cited. So please, for the benefit of my limited powers of abstraction, give an example that might actually exist somewhere in the world.

 

[Bookcat]

That is a poor excuse for not citing an example. Even a person with a well-formed conscience can nevertheless still imagine what a malformed conscience might be like. And it is not as if there is such a shortage of malformed consciences in this world that no real example can be cited. So please, for the benefit of my limited powers of abstraction, give an example that might actually exist somewhere in the world.

No point really in doing so.

and …I hate to do so…for some may take such as “an excuse” …(which of course would not be legit)…etc

Anyhow…

The Church is clear though on the principle …

and it is not really something that we expected to guide ourselves by in the sense that one says “I have an erroneous conscience about such and such but my certain judgment of conscience tells me I must do it or sin”…* the very fact that one knows this sets in motion the need to correct ones conscience*.

But it does help us understand that another person may have “acted in good conscience” even though we clearly know what they did was objectively not good.

And it can be helpful in that we know that if we form our conscience and seek to follow our certain judgments of conscience…even if we error at times …we can be “in good conscience”. Of course we need to always conform ourselves to the teachings of the Church. Such is never an “excuse” to do contrary to the Churches Teachings etc…

 

[shocktrooper]

In this case the conscience says that one may actively live one’s life as a homosexual. The conscience does not say that one must live in that manner. So the conscience does not demand a certain action that the Church teaches is wrong. The conscience only allows it. Therefore living according to Church teaching does not disobey one’s conscience. Therefore this is not a catch 22.

A better example might be where Church law demands that you hunt down and kill homosexuals on sight, and your conscience tells you that is wrong. That would be a catch 22. But thankfully there is no such Church law.

I know I have not directly answered your initial question. I am merely questioning the relevance of it.

Where in my example do you see the word “may”? The scenario is given so that you can see that someone lives a certain way because their conscience tells them it is good when that same person knows and has rejected the Church’s clear teaching that homosexual activity is SINFUL. It OFFENDS God. This person has deformed his conscience and his conscience now confirms him in sin. Acting contrary to his conscience by not living as an active homosexual (this could be because of external pressure from family) does not condemn himself just because he has violated his malformed conscience.

Violating one’s conscience can only come from pressure from outside. You can’t violate your conscience if you do what it tells you to do, whether good or bad. If I want to shoot my neighbor because I have formed my conscience in such a way that it tells me it is good to do it for one reason or another, but I ultimately don’t do it because I don’t want to deal with the cover-up since everyone else has formed their conscience to a way that I shouldn’t do it, then I don’t “condemn myself” by deciding not to do what I think is good. I don’t decide to not kill him because it is bad or wrong or against God, but simply because I do not want to be bothered with the clean up.

 

[shocktrooper]

Thank you all for the replies. I have concluded that I have made this way too confusing and complicated. I will take this offline and hit the Church’s teachings more and dive into some books concerning the subject. Thank you to those that gave me references.

God bless.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Where in my example do you see the word “may”? The scenario is given so that you can see that someone lives a certain way because their conscience tells them it is good when that same person knows and has rejected the Church’s clear teaching that homosexual activity is SINFUL. It OFFENDS God. This person has deformed his conscience and his conscience now confirms him in sin. Acting contrary to his conscience by not living as an active homosexual (this could be because of external pressure from family) does not condemn himself just because he has violated his malformed conscience.

Violating one’s conscience can only come from pressure from outside. You can’t violate your conscience if you do what it tells you to do, whether good or bad. If I want to shoot my neighbor because I have formed my conscience in such a way that it tells me it is good to do it for one reason or another, but I ultimately don’t do it because I don’t want to deal with the cover-up since everyone else has formed their conscience to a way that I shouldn’t do it, then I don’t “condemn myself” by deciding not to do what I think is good. I don’t decide to not kill him because it is bad or wrong or against God, but simply because I do not want to be bothered with the clean up.

Bookcat has sent me a much more reasonable and commonplace example by PM. I am no longer claiming the your question is irrelevant. Sorry for the trouble.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Where in my example do you see the word “may”? The scenario is given so that you can see that someone lives a certain way because their conscience tells them it is good when that same person knows and has rejected the Church’s clear teaching that homosexual activity is SINFUL. It OFFENDS God. This person has deformed his conscience and his conscience now confirms him in sin. Acting contrary to his conscience by not living as an active homosexual (this could be because of external pressure from family) does not condemn himself just because he has violated his malformed conscience.

Violating one’s conscience can only come from pressure from outside. You can’t violate your conscience if you do what it tells you to do, whether good or bad. If I want to shoot my neighbor because I have formed my conscience in such a way that it tells me it is good to do it for one reason or another, but I ultimately don’t do it because I don’t want to deal with the cover-up since everyone else has formed their conscience to a way that I shouldn’t do it, then I don’t “condemn myself” by deciding not to do what I think is good. I don’t decide to not kill him because it is bad or wrong or against God, but simply because I do not want to be bothered with the clean up.

Bookcat has sent me a much more reasonable and commonplace example by PM. I am no longer claiming that your question is irrelevant. Sorry for the trouble.

 

[LaSainte]

How about this scenario?

Say I lve in sub-Saharan Africa and I have 8 children. 2 of my children have died of starvation. My husband insists on his marital rights at whim and gives me no choice in the matter. I know that if I become pregnant again, the baby will die a horrible, painful death from starvation.

Let’s say that some aid groups in he area are providing free birth control to people. I know that the Church teaches that ABC is wrong, but I cannot practice abstinence or NFP, and m conscience tells me wig out a doubt that the only moral choice is to use ABC to prevent another pregnancy and the very painful death of any resulting child.

Am I to obey my conscience?

 

[Bookcat]

One can seek to give various scenarios in this question. …but they often will be cardboard cut outs of people…

and often are unreal “either or” scenarios…that do not take into account all the various options in life.

One cannot get even into all the aspects that may be involved in a single persons knowledge, intention, good or bad will…formation…education… etc…

I should note too that the fact that a person is a Catholic and knows something is taught to be a mortal sin for example … is going to inform their conscience. The very fact of being a Catholic…of professing the Catholic Faith as a disciple of Jesus is* part of that persons very conscience*

And a Catholic is not to “set his conscience against” the teaching of the Church he is to be what and who he is …a disciple of Jesus …a Christian. He is to form his conscience.

Is it possible though that they can have an erroneous certain judgment of conscience that here and now they must do such and such or they will sin mortally? Yes such is possible. But the fact that the person here knows the teaching of the Church is going to throw into doubt both the certainty of the judgment, the ignorance and the possible decrease in culpability for the sinful action.

(and of course another Christian who knows the truth can not tell the other one to go ahead and do the action in question…such would be a sin on their part)

CCC

IV. Erroneous Judgment

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

 

[SteveGC]

How about this scenario?

Say I lve in sub-Saharan Africa and I have 8 children. 2 of my children have died of starvation. My husband insists on his marital rights at whim and gives me no choice in the matter. I know that if I become pregnant again, the baby will die a horrible, painful death from starvation.

Let’s say that some aid groups in he area are providing free birth control to people. I know that the Church teaches that ABC is wrong, but I cannot practice abstinence or NFP, and m conscience tells me wig out a doubt that the only moral choice is to use ABC to prevent another pregnancy and the very painful death of any resulting child.

Am I to obey my conscience?

Impossible to “know that the baby will die a horrible, painful death from starvation”. So, that element of the argument must change atleast to “I think perhaps this child might have a similar death to the other 2 children”.

The next issue seems to be the husband issue, and his demand for marital relations. Seems from the way you phrased the scenario that the wife is essentially under duress to have relations with the husband. If the husband is open to life, but is being irresponsible based on other factors which should be considered when deciding when/if to have children, then he is at fault for demanding sex without due consideration for these factors.

The prohibition of ABC, however, is a clear teaching of the Church. There are no circumstances, to my knowledge, which would allow for it’s usage. One’s conscience should include this knowledge, if formed properly. So it seems the conscience in this scenario is malformed on two counts…the false conclusion that one can know with any certainty the fate of a conceived child after he is born, and the false conclusion that ABC would be a moral choice in this particular circumstance. So the short answer to your final question would be “no”.

 

[LaSainte]

The question though isn’t whether or not the conscience is malformed, but whether or not one is obligated to follow it. If NOT using ABC would violate his person’s conscience to the very core, what is she to do?

 

[Bookcat]

The question though isn’t whether or not the conscience is malformed, but whether or not one is obligated to follow it. If NOT using ABC would violate his person’s conscience to the very core, what is she to do?

The person in question (from your description) is a Catholic…so nature of the authority of the Church (from Christ!) and the teachings of the Church are part of their very conscience. Using it will violate the persons conscience to its very core. Their very *being * is Catholic…

But again I would note what I noted above.

 

[LaSainte]

The person in question (from your description) is a Catholic…so nature of the authority of the Church (from Christ!) and the teachings of the Church are part of their very conscience. Using it will violate the persons conscience to its very core. Their very *being * is Catholic…

But again I would note what I noted above.

Actually, I am a Catholic and I had to say that in this situation, not using birth control would totally violate my conscience, no matter what the church says. If I did not use it despite being basically raped by my husband and conceiving children that I felt certain would die a horrible death, I would feel guilty for the rest of my life. No matter how I tried to reconcile my conscience with Church teaching here, I don’t think I could do it.

 

[Bookcat]

Important to read the whole text in the CCC:

Here though are some of the main parts:

I. The Judgment of Conscience

1777 Moral conscience,48 present at the heart of the person, enjoins him at the appropriate moment to do good and to avoid evil. It also judges particular choices, approving those that are good and denouncing those that are evil.49 It bears witness to the authority of truth in reference to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn, and it welcomes the commandments. When he listens to his conscience, the prudent man can hear God speaking.

1778 Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law:

Conscience is a law of the mind; yet [Christians] would not grant that it is nothing more; I mean that it was not a dictate, nor conveyed the notion of responsibility, of duty, of a threat and a promise… [Conscience] is a messenger of him, who, both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by his representatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ.50

1779 It is important for every person to be sufficiently present to himself in order to hear and follow the voice of his conscience. This requirement of interiority is all the more necessary as life often distracts us from any reflection, self-examination or introspection:

Return to your conscience, question it… Turn inward, brethren, and in everything you do, see God as your witness.51

1780 The dignity of the human person implies and requires uprightness of moral conscience. Conscience includes the perception of the principles of morality (synderesis); their application in the given circumstances by practical discernment of reasons and goods; and finally judgment about concrete acts yet to be performed or already performed. the truth about the moral good, stated in the law of reason, is recognized practically and concretely by the prudent judgment of conscience. We call that man prudent who chooses in conformity with this judgment.

1781 Conscience enables one to assume responsibility for the acts performed. If man commits evil, the just judgment of conscience can remain within him as the witness to the universal truth of the good, at the same time as the evil of his particular choice. the verdict of the judgment of conscience remains a pledge of hope and mercy. In attesting to the fault committed, it calls to mind the forgiveness that must be asked, the good that must still be practiced, and the virtue that must be constantly cultivated with the grace of God:

We shall . . . reassure our hearts before him whenever our hearts condemn us; for God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.52

1782 Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. "He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters."53

 

[Bookcat]

II. The Formation of Conscience

1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. the education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.

1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. the education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.

1785 In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.55

 

[Bookcat]

III. To Choose in Accord With Conscience

1786 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.

1787 Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law.

1788 To this purpose, man strives to interpret the data of experience and the signs of the times assisted by the virtue of prudence, by the advice of competent people, and by the help of the Holy Spirit and his gifts.

1789 Some rules apply in every case:

• One may never do evil so that good may result from it;
• the Golden Rule: "Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them."56
• charity always proceeds by way of respect for one’s neighbor and his conscience: "Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience . . . you sin against Christ."57 Therefore "it is right not to . . . do anything that makes your brother stumble."58

 

[Bookcat]

IV. Erroneous Judgment

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."60

The more a correct conscience prevails, the more do persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and try to be guided by objective standards of moral conduct.61

Here are some very good articles on the subject: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8052785&postcount=21

(and read too this aspect which is often forgotten:CCC 2039 “Personal conscience and reason should not be set in opposition to the moral law or the Magisterium of the Church”…in other words we Catholic Christians and are thus to live as such…as disciples of Christ in the Church…)

CCC: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P62.HTM

 

[Bookcat]

Opps on the link on the articles…the last link is broken…(the other articles are there)

this is where is supposed to take readers:

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20090628_chius-anno-paolino_en.html

read to the end…

 

[LaSainte]

I have read that section, and all I can say is that on this matter, I wholeheartedly believe that the only rigt thing to do would be to use ABC in this circumstance. I think it would be in accordance with my conscience and with God’s will.

 

[shocktrooper]

I have read that section, and all I can say is that on this matter, I wholeheartedly believe that the only rigt thing to do would be to use ABC in this circumstance. I think it would be in accordance with my conscience and with God’s will.

Ok, this is really for Bookcat. IF LaSainte’s conscience is really telling her to use ABC, then would she condemn herself by not following her conscience even though it has been malformed or formed against God, whether she knows it or not.

Would she condemn herself if she went against her conscience and did not use ABC?

My position is that she would not condemn herself, but save herself.

Thanks.

 

[SteveGC]

Ok, this is really for Bookcat. IF LaSainte’s conscience is really telling her to use ABC, then would she condemn herself by not following her conscience even though it has been malformed or formed against God, whether she knows it or not.

Would she condemn herself if she went against her conscience and did not use ABC?

My position is that she would not condemn herself, but save herself.

Thanks.

I know you asked Bookcat, but if I may add my opinion?

To me, in this scenario, no one is forcing her to act contrary to a well-formed conscience. If we presume she knows that ABC is immoral, then how, in this scenario, is someone pressuring her to act contrary to it? What’s she’s using as an excuse for that pressure is a subjective opinion based on little else than some questionable logic of a 25% chance that the next child she might have would die of starvation at some point in its childhood. To me, that doesn’t exculpate her from knowing and choosing the objectively good choice (to not use ABC).

The only gray area in this scenario is the husband’s irrational demand for sex without due concern for mutual consent from the wife. That’s a separate problem. The wife’s conscience is improperly formed if she is “convinced” that ABC is the proper choice.

Peace.