A response to Rob concerning his questions to me on conscience protection

 

Thank you, Rob, for your questions and comments on my posting regarding conscience and its protection that I posted yesterday.

 

As I mentioned then, the Mirror of Justice is a web log dedicated to the development of Catholic legal theory, and because of that, I believe it is essential that we consider issues from the Catholic perspective. This does not preclude our discussion of other views on the matters under discussion and debate. Moreover, it does not mean that the Catholic perspective cannot share views with the non-Catholic viewpoint on many issues; however, it is clear that there will be disagreements on some occasions. With regard to issues dealing with conscience and its protection, I believe that you and I do arrive on the same side, as you said, on many components of the conscience debate. We have discussed these agreements in the past, both here at MOJ and in person.

 

But, there have been a few occasions when we have disagreed. I cannot predict if disagreements will occur again, but I cannot rule out the possibility. Moreover, our disagreements have not always been on issues bearing the same or uniform weight. The fact that we may disagree on some issues does not mean that one of our consciences is not well-formed. In some areas, I think there can be disagreement within and outside the Catholic community on particular issues because the Church’s teachings have not yet been precisely defined, e.g., capital punishment. Having said this, I think that it is clear that the Church does teach that there is a very strong presumption against the legitimacy of capital punishment in most instances. However, on issues such as abortion, torture, marriage, and embryonic stem cell research that will take the life of the embryo, the Church’s teachings are much more precise and clear.

 

I also think we both agree that there are many Catholics and non-Catholics who arrive at the same position on abortion, torture, marriage, and embryonic stem cell research. Here, I would like to recall a point I made yesterday about this intersection of views: “The Catholic perspective may, Deo gratias, intersect with those held by persons of other religious persuasions or persons with no religious views, but there is no guarantee that this will be the case.” The Catholic it would seem is asked by the Church to develop his or her conscience in light of the Church’s teachings so that the person’s conscience is consistent with the Church’s teachings on the matter that is of concern to conscience. Of course, there are persons, including some Catholics, who take a different approach and arrive at a different position than mine. It appears that the Mirror of Justice has been one venue in which these disagreements have presented themselves.

 

When the non-Catholic is under consideration, I realize—as I think you do—that he or she is not obliged to study Catholic teachings when forming his or her conscience. However, he or she may take some other approach that still leads to the same conclusions that the Catholic should develop and hold. In both cases, these persons—Catholic and non-Catholic—should have arrived at a well-formed conscience that merits protection. In the context of the non-Catholic, the Church’s teachings are not imposed on him or her. In the case of the Catholic, the faithful person who is Catholic and chooses to remain so elects to use the Church’s teachings in the formation of his or her conscience. This is the response I offer to your first issue.

 

Regarding the second issue you raise, you state that a person (I am assuming you mean a Catholic here) “may be culpable for a poorly formed conscience, but not for following that poorly formed conscience.” In either case, the person has a poorly formed conscience, and by what you said, the person remains culpable. Are you in fact asking what, if anything, should happen to the Catholic who has a poorly formed conscience whether or not he or she follows it?

 

Thanks, Rob. If the need be, I look forward to continuing this discussion with you.

 

RJA sj