MORAL CONSCIENCE

1776 "Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man's most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths."47

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

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

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

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

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), May 23, 2003

Answers

bump for whatshisname

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), May 23, 2003.

Kiwi, I like the last one, ,1794. " A good and pure coscience is enlightened by true faith,..." and " The more a correct conscience prevails, the more do persons and groups turn aside from blind choice..."

To me they summarize this whole passsage. There is a book called the Bible, which most people don't read. There is a bunch of Patristic writings, which the majority (99%) will never read.

But in reading what has been passed down to us, morality is relative to the period in which one lives.

For example: it was OK for Abrahan, Isaac and Jacob to marry close relatives. Also it was OK to have many wives.Moses put a stop to close relatives, but still allowed many women and divorce. He also introduced the concept of marrying one's sister -in-law if the brother died to raise children.

In the beginnin were not allowed in the temple. Laws were more cruel. From stoning to hanging.

Jesus did not believe in divorce. Paul did under certain conditions. Both agree on staying celibate for the Kingdom of God. Both agree that women belonged in the same congregation as men. For Jesus forgiveness was of the essence.

Later church leaders have joined with the state to punish those they considered heretical. That's why Israel practiced ethnic cleansing. That is why there are only Muslims in Saudi Arabia. That is why at one time Western Europe was 99.00% Roman Catholic or Orthodox.

As a child, women entered the church kneeling down. They had long dresses. Those were considered good women. Now they have skirts, mini- blouses,...

Back then there was no contraception, divorce, living together, sleeping just for the fun of it,and so on which more than 50 % of the people practice. For them, it is OK. So their coscience tells them everything is OK. In the old days the church discipline was so strict that it took years to receive communion, and so on.

So in essence, whatever was good yesterday is not necessarily good today. It is considered old fashioned. So conscience changes to fit the new realities.

Here at the forum we argue over trivial stuuf. The rest of the people could care less.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 23, 2003.

Whether or not Jesus was God is not "trivial stuff."
Whether or not Mary was "ever virgin" is not "trivial stuff."
You, Elpidio, would have us believe that St. Joseph was Jesus's biological father. That ain't "trivial."
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 23, 2003.

The giant awakened!

Hi, John. I barely get a chance to get in the internet.

So this is the point: Neither, you, me, Eugene, Kiwi, Rod,....and many others have a theology degree. We don't die over definitions like they do. We can get upset. But not go and get even with the person who supposedly heard our feelings. That is why is an open Catholic forum to a certain degree.

Now, learn to stick to the subject. Read the post again. What dou you understand what is morality based on your conscience and that of the Church.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 23, 2003.

I meant "hurt" instead of heard. As for the sleeping Giant I meant you, John G. You can smell me like from here to China.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 23, 2003.

Dear Elpidio,

There has always been contraception, divorce, sleeping together for the fun of it. Come now, my friend.

Its just that all of society now makes public excuses for them and have made all manner of things, which before were objectively and remain objectively evil, subjectively neutral or even good and simply matters of personal choice and privacy. This can very easily be done and is done in this forum almost regularly, although with somewhat different perversions and preferences, when the objective truth of the teachings of the one true Catholic Church are not intentionally incorporated into each and every Catholic's conscience. This leads to the errors which are frequently debated here and often divide those who are on the same side of the issue but disagree on tactics. Personally, it make me very sad. But that is the human condition.

Conscience, uninformed by choice, leads to death ultimatly with all kinds of mayhem along the way. To educate one's conscience is our fundamental option. It is where the most basic choice of good or evil is confronted on every issue. For me there is not enough emphasis on education of the conscience. I see much more regarding following it than educating it. That is like following an idiot into battle against a disciplined enemy who knows all the best ways to deceive you and he knows that you are blissfully unaware of his goal, your soul.

Oh, my heavens I just made a RAP. Ugh!

Karl

-- Karl (PArkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 24, 2003.

Hi.

Here is a very simple thought, so hang on tightly.

There are three kinds of morallity: social conformity, individual, and God's morallity. I do believe that we each find our morals swimming in one of the three kinds and sometimes simultaneously in two or all of them. I am a skeptic most of the time, so social conformity is like a small pond. I constantly with myself, so my morals are like a deep well. But, I'm not a Saint, so it is tough to manuever in the great ocean with my canoe, unless we all embarc together in God's ship.

Ro

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 25, 2003.

Rod, many people have died or killed trying to figure out what is God's morality. That is tough.

You see : God doesn't marry, he doesn't have kids like us, he doesn't live a life like us,... maybe that is the reason why he is many times too patient with us.

Anyone knows what God wears, puts on, carries with him, ...?

According to Genesis, Adam and Eve were naked. That didn't bother God. When Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, knowing good and evil, they covered themselves. Still God didn't get bothered by that. There is no mention of too much or too little clothing by him.

Killing is bad. Yet Moses killed, Abraham killed, David Killed, Elijah killed, Samuel killed,... yet he wasn't bothered by that when he called them to be his servants.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 27, 2003.

Hi Elpidio.

I expect that there will be times to kill and die. It is part of being human. So is sin.

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 28, 2003.

Ooops, I didn't mean to sound like a bumper sticker.

Have a nice day!

Oops, did it again.

rod "Just Sticking Around."

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 28, 2003.

Just don't get bumped off the road, Rod.

I have been reading most of your comments of late. I have seen a more profound way of looking at things, from your perspective, than I anticipated this soon to happen. Just like Eugene, you have a lot of common sense. This mixed with questioning and deepening into a subject makes for words I never imagined you would say. You have a great intellect.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 29, 2003.

8. This brings us to a direct discussion of the other topic I referred to at the beginning: the relationship between true justice and the individual conscience.

In the encyclical Veritatis splendor I wrote: “The way in which one conceives the relationship between freedom and law is thus intimately bound up with one’s understanding of the moral conscience” (no. 54).

If this is true with regard to the so-called “internal forum,” doubtless a correlation also exists between canon law and the subject’s conscience with regard to the “external forum.” Here the relationship is established between the judgment of someone who authentically and legitimately interprets the law, even in an individual, concrete case, and the conscience of someone who has appealed to canonical authority: that is between the ecclesiastical judge and the parties to a case in the canonical process.

In this regard I wrote in the encyclical letter Dominum et vivificantem: “Conscience therefore is not an independent and exclusive capacity to decide what is good and what is evil. Rather there is profoundly imprinted upon it a principle of obedience vis-a-vis the objective norm which establishes and conditions the correspondence of its decisions, with the commands and prohibitions which are the basis of human behavior” (no. 43). And in the encyclical Veritatis splendor I added: “The authority of the Church, when she pronounces on moral questions, in no way undermines the freedom of conscience of Christians ... also because the Magisterium does not bring to the Christian conscience truths which are extraneous to it; rather it brings to fight the truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith. The Church puts herself always and only at the service of conscience, helping it to avoid being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine proposed by human deceit (cf. Eph 4:14), and helping it not to swerve from the truth about the good of man, but rather, especially in more difficult questions, to attain the truth with certainty and to abide in it” (no. 64).

JPII

-- kjw (info@juno.com), June 02, 2003.

Is this another e-mail adress, Kiwi?

Is this another letter from the Pope? Which is the focus for this one?

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egopnzalez@srla.org), June 04, 2003.

Hi Elpido, "kjv" is not me. Blessings

-- Kiwi (csiherwood@hotmail.com), June 05, 2003.

I meant "kjw" aint me

-- Kiwi (csiherwood@hotmail.com), June 05, 2003.