Pope Urges More Reliance on Individual Conscience

[Gorgias]

Ah, yes. Paint by numbers morality. What could go wrong there…

The Church’s teaching – and Memaw’s nod to proper formation of conscience – isn’t “paint by numbers” by any stretch!

In fact, it seems to acknowledge an iterative approach that’s more heuristic than programmatic: * Form conscience. * Encounter real-life situation. * Apply conscience in order to make moral decision in that situation. * Evaluate whether conscience and Church teaching coincide. * If there’s a discrepancy between the two, loop back to step 1 and strive to re-form conscience in that regard.

the CCC is nothing if not self-aware of the complexities of morality. Its sections on conscience don’t simply say, “Do as we say – even if doing so violates your conscience – or burn in hell.”

No, it’s not that simple. Yet, it’s not a prescription for anarchy in ‘grey areas’.

After all, the teachings of the Church are rather clear, and the method by which Catholics are called to follow the teachings is straightforward (and iterative, and calls for a heuristic approach – which requires for continual reformation and repentance and resolve to try again).

 

[gracepoole]

What are gray areas of morality?

I think you already know. The CCC allows for instances when prudential judgment must be exercised, for instance.

I don’t see how anyone could read the CCC improperly and justify an immoral action. Do you have an example for this?

First, I didn’t say one could. Second, head over to the Zika virus thread, where folks are openly calling the pope a heretic for expounding on what he sees as a “gray area of morality.”

 

[TMC]

I think the Pope is re-emphasizing the need for Catholics to look to their own conscience when making tough moral choices. I have read that the upcoming exhortation on the family will similarly refer to the “internal forum” as a way to resolve the issue of communion for the remarried. I know that some Catholics want an easy yes/no checklist of dos and don’ts, but real life is not like that, and neither is (or should be) religion or morality. Life is not a short and simple list of yes/no - we need to use our consciences and discernment and make some hard decisions as we go.

 

[Gorgias]

lax16:

What are gray areas of morality?

I think you already know. The CCC allows for instances when prudential judgment must be exercised, for instance.

Apples and oranges.

The fact that there situations that call for prudential judgment doesn’t mean that there aren’t objective moral principles upon which the judgment is based! Rather, it means that there is an individual component – a component in which the person is called upon to apply the relevant objective principles – that relies on a well-formed conscience as the guide which leads a person to a prudent course of action.

If by ‘gray area’ you simply mean ‘a difficult question to unpack’, then sure… it is that! But, I think you’re using it in the more common sense – a question that admits of many contradictory (and seemingly mutually exclusive) answers. That’s not at all what’s in play here.

head over to the Zika virus thread, where folks are openly calling the pope a heretic for expounding on what he sees as a “gray area of morality.”

Does the pope call it a ‘gray area’? I haven’t seen that. No, instead, I think, he’s identifying that it’s a difficult question. Not ‘gray’, but ‘requiring careful analysis’.

 

[ARSpade]

My comment wasn’t meant to be insulting or rude. And I do know that we’re meant to have well-formed consciences. But the CCC is nothing if not self-aware of the complexities of morality…But to say that one cannot recognize and act on the gray areas of morality is to render the entire section on conscience in the CCC worthless.

Morality isn’t complex.

People make it complex because they want loopholes to justify whatever it is that they already want to do.

 

[gracepoole]

Morality isn’t complex.

People make it complex because they want loopholes to justify whatever it is that they already want to do.

Good God… That’s a frightening and breathtaking assumption. Review the whole of recorded philosophy and religion – morality is indeed complex at times. Why is that, do you think, that threads about the death penalty or waterboarding go on for pages around here?

 

[lax16]

I think you already know. The CCC allows for instances when prudential judgment must be exercised, for instance.

No, I actually have no idea. There is not one moral issue that is in the gray area that I can think of.

First, I didn’t say one could.

***Yes, if they’re read improperly, one could use these teachings to justify immoral actions (having an abortion, for example) that violate the Church’s moral laws. But to say that one cannot recognize and act on the gray areas of morality is to render the entire section on conscience in the CCC worthless.

---

Second, head over to the Zika virus thread, where folks are openly calling the pope a heretic for expounding on what he sees as a “gray area of morality.”

The Pope sees the Zika virus (and its prevention) as a gray area of morality? How so?

 

[lax16]

Good God… That’s a frightening and breathtaking assumption. Review the whole of recorded philosophy and religion – morality is indeed complex at times. Why is that, do you think, that threads about the death penalty or waterboarding go on for pages around here?

No, it’s really not.

I think we all know where Jesus stands on these issues.

 

[ARSpade]

Good God… That’s a frightening and breathtaking assumption. Review the whole of recorded philosophy and religion – morality is indeed complex at times. Why is that, do you think, that threads about the death penalty or waterboarding go on for pages around here?

Because, as I said, people are looking for loopholes that allow them to do, or not do, the things they already want to do (or not do) regardless of what good Catholic morality/theology says. People want to execute criminals and torture people. They know the Church’s teachings on it, so they muddy the water to try to get away with doing it anyway.

This is similar to how a (former?) friend went after my wife about abortion. My wife said it’s always no to abortion. The other side then tossed all these arguments and scenarios at my wife trying to make the issue complex and all gray colored to get my wife to say, "Well, okay, in that situation it’s fine. They were quite annoyed when the answer kept coming back as “No.” regardless or the scenario.

Catholic morality is, mostly, super easy and pretty well defined. Living it is hard.

“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.”

ETA: I did the same thing with the death penalty for years. Then I realized it was easier to just shut up and color. There’s enough to deal with in life without trying to make up and justify my own morality while claiming to be Catholic.

 

[Lormar]

Our conscience must be properly formed according to the teachings of the Church, otherwise it is not trustworthy. Didn’t we go through that whole conscience thing in the 70’s and 80’s and look where it has gotten so many Catholics that think they can make up their own mind about what to believe and what they don’t “want” to believe. It just doesn’t work that way to be honest with ourseves on the matter!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Lormar]

I think I was happier when Our Holy Fathers were quieter, did not globe trot, and rarely gave interviews. The 24/7 news cycle and off the cuff remarks do not a magesterium make.

So was I.

I remember a time when we rarely, if ever, heard news of the Holy Fathers. Even when they wrote an encyclical. The only time we would hear about it is if it directly pertained to the faithful in the pews (i.e. Holy Week changes, changes in fasting rules etc.)

Catholics were a lot less contentious too. Today, we are polarized and spend more time fighting each other than concentrating on the one thing necessary.

 

[Mongo]

Our conscience must be properly formed according to the teachings of the Church, otherwise it is not trustworthy. Didn’t we go through that whole conscience thing in the 70’s and 80’s and look where it has gotten so many Catholics that think they can make up their own mind about what to believe and what they don’t “want” to believe. It just doesn’t work that way to be honest with ourseves on the matter!! God Bless, Memaw

Saying follow your conscience is like saying follow common sense in modern understanding. It is pretty clear though that without the basic knowledge of truth it is a meaningless word. Without proper formation in the faith it means nothing just like it is meaningless to say that Americans should follow common sense when voting for president. Many Americans reject the bill of rights or atleast some of its amendments. Without natural law conscience becomes meaningless just like common sense politics in America is meaningless without a basic knowledge of the constitution.

 

[gracepoole]

No, I actually have no idea. There is not one moral issue that is in the gray area that I can think of.



***Yes, if they’re read improperly, one could use these teachings to justify immoral actions (having an abortion, for example) that violate the Church’s moral laws. But to say that one cannot recognize and act on the gray areas of morality is to render the entire section on conscience in the CCC worthless.

---

Sorry – the key word above is “improperly.” If one wants to misuse the CCC, it can definitely be done to justify immoral actions. But it can’t **legitimately **be used to justify anything immoral.

The Pope sees the Zika virus (and its prevention) as a gray area of morality? How so?

The question he’s raised is over the moral use of ABC to prevent pregnancy near a Zika virus outbreak. I don’t want to derail things here – but there is in fact an entire thread devoted to the subject. And yes, he seems to have stepped into a gray area.

 

[gracepoole]

No, it’s really not.

I think we all know where Jesus stands on these issues.

These issues aren’t even defined as black & white by the CCC. How is it that you’re so sure, then, about their morality?

 

[lax16]

Sorry – the key word above is “improperly.” If one wants to misuse the CCC, it can definitely be done to justify immoral actions. But it can’t **legitimately **be used to justify anything immoral.

Okay, I see what you mean now.

The question he’s raised is over the moral use of ABC to prevent pregnancy near a Zika virus outbreak. I don’t want to derail things here – but there is in fact an entire thread devoted to the subject. And yes, he seems to have stepped into a gray area.

I am aware of the other thread and what is in the news regarding the Pope’s comments. However, that does not change Church teaching on the matter. If the Pope says anything out of line with Catholic teaching, I would have to think he either he is dreaming or has a fever. I am not going to think what he says trumps the catechism. The CCC does not change with his comments.

He may think there is a gray area, or he is being grossly misquoted, but there is not.

Many people are hoping there is a gray area in order to justify their own situation and to ignore Church teaching on the issue of birth control. Frankly, I am not sure why abstinence has not been suggested, or if it has, I must have missed it.

 

[lax16]

These issues aren’t even defined as black & white by the CCC. How is it that you’re so sure, then, about their morality?

It is clearly stated, with the issue of the death penalty for example, that if a person can be incarcerated and is not a threat to society s/he should not be put to death.

There are people that are very pro- death penalty, but not because it is what is best for society. It is for revenge.

If one reads the CCC and allows it to shape his or her conscience, the answers are very black and white. The situation may not be, but the answer is.

 

[gracepoole]

If the Pope says anything out of line with Catholic teaching, I would have to think he either he is dreaming or has a fever.

Haha. As you wish.

 

[gracepoole]

It is clearly stated, with the issue of the death penalty for example, that if a person can be incarcerated and is not a threat to society s/he should not be put to death.

There are people that are very pro- death penalty, but not because it is what is best for society. It is for revenge.

If one reads the CCC and allows it to shape his or her conscience, the answers are very black and white. The situation may not be, but the answer is.

Look, I’m totally against the use of the death penalty and waterboarding. But I’ve also been engaged with multiple folks in debates about if or when either might be used. And while I’m extremely uncomfortable making their arguments for them (as I don’t agree with them), they certainly point back to the CCC as providing openings for the use of both. Make of it what you will, I suppose.

 

[lax16]

Look, I’m totally against the use of the death penalty and waterboarding. But I’ve also been engaged with multiple folks in debates about if or when either might be used. And while I’m extremely uncomfortable making their arguments for them (as I don’t agree with them), they certainly point back to the CCC as providing openings for the use of both. Make of it what you will, I suppose.

I hear ya! However, I truly believe that if people were in line with the mind and heart of Jesus, they would find themselves being more merciful.

 

[Ender]

Ah, yes. Paint by numbers morality. What could go wrong there…

Yes, it’s much like paint by numbers physics. You learn the basic, inviolable laws, and figure out how to apply what you’ve learned in concrete circumstances. We don’t get to create our own moral reality any more than we can create our own physical reality, which is not to say our judgments will always be just or our bridges won’t occasionally collapse.

Ender