A Must-Read Article on Conscience

[Fantine]

Thanks, Father James Martin, SJ.

Besides being a wonderful article, it had this quote--you'll never guess who wrote it:

“Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. Conscience confronts [the individual] with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups, even of the official church.”

It explores the approaches of theologians Germain Grisez and Benhard Haring, CSsR.

It discusses the philosophy of Yves Congar, and the "community model" v.s. the "hierarchical model" of church (the Church used the community model for half of its existence).

As Pope Francis says: “Differing currents of thought in philosophy, theology, and pastoral practice, if open to being reconciled by the Spirit in respect and love, can enable the church to grow, since all of them help to express more clearly the immense riches of God’s word. For those who long for a monolithic body of doctrine guarded by all and leaving no room for nuance, this might appear as undesirable and leading to confusion. But, in fact, such variety serves to bring out and develop different facets of the inexhaustible riches of the Gospel.”

This is a wonderful article.
http://americamagazine.org/issue/following-faithfully

 

[Gwendolyn]

The important thing to remember about conscience in its Catholic context is this: conscience is not defined as a small voice or urgent feeling that tells you what to do.

Conscience, for Catholics, must be properly formed according to what we know about moral theology and making moral decisions. It is our duty as Catholics to ensure our conscience is properly formed, though obviously honest ignorance can affect culpability.

If you know what the Church teaches, and you understand it, but simply disagree and choose an immoral course of action, that is not a proper exercise of conscience. That is disobedience. We are all free to do it, but it does not make immoral actions moral - especially where intrinsic evil is concerned.

 

[Michie]

The important thing to remember about conscience in its Catholic context is this: conscience is not defined as a small voice or urgent feeling that tells you what to do.

Conscience, for Catholics, must be properly formed according to what we know about moral theology and making moral decisions. It is our duty as Catholics to ensure our conscience is properly formed, though obviously honest ignorance can affect culpability.

If you know what the Church teaches, and you understand it, but simply disagree and choose an immoral course of action, that is not a proper exercise of conscience. That is disobedience. We are all free to do it, but it does not make immoral actions moral - especially where intrinsic evil is concerned.

Exactly. I do not understand why so many are confused by this issue & simply insist it is different than the RCC plainly teaches.

 

[Fantine]

I'll let the article respond:

How are Catholics to behave in conscience when their understanding of a noninfallible teaching of the magisterium differs from that proposed by the magisterium—as the majority of Catholic faithful now do, for instance, on contraception and Communion for the divorced and remarried? Congar points out that when the church is conceived as a hierarchical institution, obedience to church authority is called for; when it is conceived of as a communion, dialogue and consensus are called for. These same two answers to our question continue to be offered in the church today.

The long adherence of the church to teachings on the taking of interest on loans, slavery and religious freedom are well-known examples of distorting moral traditions that it now rejects. Father Ratzinger concluded to what is obvious: “consequently tradition must not be considered only affirmatively but also critically.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church repeats the teaching of the Second Vatican Council and places both the council’s and the church’s teaching beyond doubt: women and men have “the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions” (No. 1782). In his homily at the synod’s closing Mass, Pope Francis told the assembled bishops that “God is not afraid of new things. That is why he is continuously surprising us, and guiding us in unexpected ways.”

 

[Michie]

God does not go against his own Laws. We can't either.

 

[Fantine]

So you disagree with Pope Francis' and Cardinal Ratzinger's comments as quoted, and with the community model of church which brought it all the way through the middle ages?

As Pope Francis said:

For those who long for a monolithic body of doctrine guarded by all and leaving no room for nuance, this might appear as undesirable and leading to confusion. But, in fact, such variety serves to bring out and develop different facets of the inexhaustible riches of the Gospel.

Or as the nuns in grammar school used to say:

"Leave room for the Holy Spirit."

I realize this is difficult for many of you.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

I read the article, and the comments. My head hurts. The article is just more American Magazine leftist spin. It's opinion. Many of the comments make more sense.

 

[Fantine]

I read the article, and the comments. My head hurts. The article is just more American Magazine leftist spin. It's opinion. Many of the comments make more sense.

There are a lot of quotes, and the quotes are what I was primarily interested in.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

And of course I trust American Magazine quotes everyone accurately. Excuse me while I go to a Vatican website to verify.

 

[MikeK]

And of course I trust American Magazine quotes everyone accurately. Excuse me while I go to a Vatican website to verify.

Great, let us know what you find!

 

[Davidnic]

I'll let the article respond:

But the quotes talk about the role of conscience assuming we are using the definition the Church has for one properly formed. They do not refer to conscience as a personal revelation independent of Church teaching. That is not what conscience, properly formed, in Catholic teaching is.

So the quotes are nice but must be read in the context of what the Church teaches is a properly formed conscience.

Gwens point stands un-refuted and actually affirmed by the quotes taken in context.

 

[Fantine]

Including this quote from Joseph Ratzinger after Vatican II?

“Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. Conscience confronts [the individual] with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups, even of the official church.”

 

[Davidnic]

Including this quote from Joseph Ratzinger after Vatican II?

Yes, because in context he is talking about when the Church would do something that opposes that can not be changed or taught against. Not when the Church teaches with proper authority.

 

[Fantine]

I think that you are one of those Pope Francis talks about here:

For those who long for a monolithic body of doctrine guarded by all and leaving no room for nuance, this might appear as undesirable and leading to confusion. But, in fact, such variety serves to bring out and develop different facets of the inexhaustible riches of the Gospel.

And I understand that those who long for a monolithic body of doctrine will look at every quote in this article differently from those who want to leave room for nuance.

And I understand that they will fight tooth and nail against the "community" image of Church as outlined by Yves Congar in favor of the "hierarchical" image of Church that did not even exist until the 11th century...

The difference is that those of us who believe in the community image feel like finally, after so many years, we have someone in the Vatican in our corner.

 

[Davidnic]

I think that you are one of those Pope Francis talks about here:



And I understand that those who long for a monolithic body of doctrine will look at every quote in this article differently from those who want to leave room for nuance.

And I understand that they will fight tooth and nail against the "community" image of Church as outlined by Yves Congar in favor of the "hierarchical" image of Church that did not even exist until the 11th century...

The difference is that those of us who believe in the community image feel like finally, after so many years, we have someone in the Vatican in our corner.

I do not long for a monolothic body of doctrine and be wary of personally aimed attacks, they are violations of the rules.

The book the quote comes from exists in our library and I just digitally searched it: Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, ed. Vorgrimler, 1968, on Gaudium et spes, part 1,chapter 1.

Now all five volumes exist in print as well and I can look at them tonight when I go to work. The quote is supposed to be on page 134. So I am sure there is more context.


It is not that I want a monolithic edifice of doctrine and do not want community models. I just know that the Pope and the former Pope are talking in reference to the Truths that can not be changed. They are not talking about a wishlist of relativism.

Before I believe quotes taken out of context I do two things. One I put them into context. Which involves, in this case looking at them in light of the theology that will not change. And then I verify the quote by going to a primary source. When I find it quoted all around the internet and have a source listed, I go to that source.

 

[Dylan Michael]

The important thing to remember about conscience in its Catholic context is this: conscience is not defined as a small voice or urgent feeling that tells you what to do.

Conscience, for Catholics, must be properly formed according to what we know about moral theology and making moral decisions. It is our duty as Catholics to ensure our conscience is properly formed, though obviously honest ignorance can affect culpability.

If you know what the Church teaches, and you understand it, but simply disagree and choose an immoral course of action, that is not a proper exercise of conscience. That is disobedience. We are all free to do it, but it does not make immoral actions moral - especially where intrinsic evil is concerned.

You wrote what I was thinking better than I ever could.


From the Catechism:

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

 

[Davidnic]

In catholic Moral Theology there are seven types of conscience.



Correct conscience
Erroneous conscience
Bad conscience
Weak conscience
Scrupulous conscience
Lax conscience
Informed conscience

We can have different combinations of these at any given time. The one that has primacy over things is a Correct or Informed Conscience or, ideally the combination of, Correct Informed Conscience.

That is the one(s) the Church teaches has primacy. That is simply fact. That does not oppose a community model of the Church. But it does oppose a relativist wishlist that appeals only to feelings and ill formed conscience as requirement.

 

[Davidnic]

None of this is new.

"I shall drink . . To Conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards."
Cardinal John Henry Newman

Followed, much later by:

"If Newman places conscience above authority, he is not proclaiming anything new with respect to the constant teaching of the Church."
Pope John Paul II

But both of them knew the context. It seems many today want to take conscience out of context as a justification for a do what you want and sing hymns logic.

 

[Davidnic]

And the end of the day the full context of the future B16 quote will be found in: Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, Vol. 5, H. Vorgrimler (ed.), 1969, Burns & Oates, London

I believe pg. 134

So I will look at it tonight. Given the rest of his theology, I think safe money is on the fact that he is speaking of conscience as the Church has taught of it for over 2000 years. Just a guess...but I am fairly confident in that.

 

[Davidnic]

Full quote (for the moment, still need to get a hard copy in my hands):

“for Newman, conscience represents the inner complement and limit of the Church principle. Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, if necessary even against the requirement of the ecclesiastical authority.” (“The dignity of the human person”, in H. Vorgrimler (ed.), Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, Vol. 5
[London: Burns & Oates, 1969] 134-36).

Notice (Digitally it seems) he is quoting Newman and expounding on what Newman thought. So first off the quote as quoted in the article and around the internet places it as if it was B16's thought and not his exposition on what Newman believed. Now Newman, as JPII pointed out, is not out of line with what the Church has consistently taught. Which means we have to go and look at what that teaching is. And that would be that a correct and informed conscience is prime. Not just any feeling or belief. And we need to look at how the Church defines a correct and informed conscience.

So first off, the quote from B16 before he was Pope was presented as his thought not his comment on "for Newman" It is not really honest of the sources to cut off those first words to present the quote as other than it is. But since the main place the quotes exists chronologically on the internet is on a woman priest site...it is not surprising that it spread in the incomplete form because that form allows it to be intentionally and unintentionally misapplied.

At least that is what it seems. As I said there is no substitute for the actual source. The hard copy is listed as in on the shelf and I should be able to head in early enough this morning to look at it. It is possible the "for Newman" is also added on the internet. One never knows until you look at the book. But at the moment the phrase "For Newman" does proceed the quote on pg. 134 as far as I can digitally verify.