Kalscheur on Murray on Freedom

Earlier in our conversation on conscience and authority, Fr. Araujo quoted John Courtney Murray's observation that “[T]he Declaration [on Religious Freedom] nowhere lends its authority to the theory for which the phrase frequently stands, namely, that I have a right to do what my conscience tells me to do, simply because my conscience tells me to do it. This is a perilous theory. Its particular peril is subjectivism—the notion that, in the end, it is my conscience, and not the objective truth, which determines what is right or wrong, true or false.”

Boston College law prof and former MoJ-er Greg Kalscheur, S.J., offers the following supplement to this quotation:

Thanks to Bob Araujo for calling attention to the the discussion of conscience and freedom found in John Courtney Murray's commentary on the Declaration on Religious Freedom.  MOJ readers might also be interested in Murray's post-conciliar thoughts regarding freedom in the Church.  In a 1966 article entitled "Freedom, Authority, Community," Murray argued that "the classical conception of the vertical relationship of authority and freedom . . . needs to assume a more Christian and therefore more human form by standing forth in the living flesh and blood that is the Christian community.  More abstractly, the vertical relationship of command-obedience needs to be complemented by the horizontal relationship of dialogue between authority and the free Christian community.  The two relationships do not cancel, but reciprocally support, each other.  This more adequate understanding of the ecclesial relationship does not indeed dissolve the inevitable tension between freedom and authority.  But by situating this perennial polarity within the living context of community, it can serve to make the tension healthy and creative, releasing energies radiant from both poles for their one common task, which is to build the beloved community."  Murray's article can be found at pp. 209-21 of "Bridging the Sacred and the Secular: Selected Writings of John Courtney Murray, S.J. (edited by J. Leon Hooper, S.J., Georgetown Univ. Press, 1994).  It's a shame that Murray's death prevented him from articulating the "full theology of Christian freedom in its relation to the doctrinal and disciplinary authority of the Church" to which he alluded in fn. 58 of his commentary (previously cited by Bob).

Rob