The Catechism of the Catholic Church is very badly wrong on “conscience”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is very badly wrong on “conscience”.

Here are the two passages that very wrongly give conscience absolute power. They explicitly state without doubt that conscience must always be followed…
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.
1800 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience.
These two passages are rightly and directly contradicted by the encyclical VERITATIS SPLENDOR by Pope John Paul II which say that intrinsic evil i.e. abortion/murder can never be permitted by conscience.
VERITATIS SPLENDOR…
52 The negative precepts of the natural law are universally valid. They oblige each and every individual, always and in every circumstance. It is a matter of prohibitions which forbid a given action semper et pro semper, without exception, because the choice of this kind of behaviour is in no case compatible with the goodness of the will of the acting person, with his vocation to life with God and to communion with his neighbour. It is prohibited — to everyone and in every case — to violate these precepts. They oblige everyone, regardless of the cost, never to offend in anyone, beginning with oneself, the personal dignity common to all.
58. The importance of this interior dialogue of man with himself can never be adequately appreciated. But it is also a dialogue of man with God, the author of the law, the primordial image and final end of man. Saint Bonaventure teaches that "conscience is like God's herald and messenger; it does not command things on its own authority, but commands them as coming from God's authority, like a herald when he proclaims the edict of the king. This is why conscience has binding force".103
59 The Church has always taught that one may never choose kinds of behaviour prohibited by the moral commandments expressed in negative form in the Old and New Testaments. As we have seen, Jesus himself reaffirms that these prohibitions allow no exceptions: "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments... You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness" (Mt 19:17-18).52
90. The relationship between faith and morality shines forth with all its brilliance in the unconditional respect due to the insistent demands of the personal dignity of every man, demands protected by those moral norms which prohibit without exception actions which are intrinsically evil.

2Share13 888

OrthocatMay 27

St. Thomas Aquinas wrestled with these questions of the limits of how human conscience binds a person in the Summa [see: nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/st1-2-q19-aa5-6.pdf] St. Paul touched on the subject in the N.T. when speaking to the churches in Rome & Corinth over the issue of whether eating meat from idol sacrifice was permitted or a sin. The upshot was those who were weak in faith could see it as sin by their conscience and should abstain, those who had no problem should take care not to scandalize others. Interesting that Francis and other progressive modernist clergy never cared much about scandalizing the faithful BUT seemed to be more about not offending the worldly!

Malki TzedekMay 27

The Bergoglio contingent never cared much for St Thomas Aquinas either.

OrthocatMay 26edited

It's a fact that Francis stated this error. He believed that if one's conscience is followed, one can commit an objectively grave sinful act and culpability is diminished even to the point where it's eliminated altogether. He said so to James Martin S.J. when he apologized for calling sodomy a "sin not a crime" to the African bishops. He told the wayward Jesuit that he was "speaking in theological generalities" and NOT declaring the sinfulness of those in the 'gay lifestyle.' With the exception of being forced against one's will [rape] and possibly 'invincible ignorance' {quite rare} it difficult to see how malformed conscience excuses sexual sins!

123jussiMay 27

Francis is correct in the abstract but it is difficult to conclude that someone can act against Gods will in good conscience unless they are irrational ie insane.

One more comment from Orthocat

OrthocatMay 26edited

The command to obey one's conscience has always been under the assumption that it is a well-formed conscience that adheres to the teachings of the Church and the natural law God has "written in our hearts." This is why when a person behaves wickedly one might say they're unconscionable. But of course since the Enlightenment, man has celebrated that 'human reason alone' is the guide for living a 'good life' so appeals to conscience has been used as the ultimate excuse for unbridled human liberty/license. In the post-Vatican II church this was pitched as "thinking Catholics" who will decide for themselves which tenets of the faith to accept and which to reject. Francis' 'synodal church' seeks to institutionalize this approach!

Malki TzedekMay 26

Thereby the Church becomes a 'buffet' Faith.

chris griffinMay 26

@Orthocat...you said "The command to obey one's conscience has always been under the assumption that it is a well-formed conscience". That assumption has not proved true and really never was true.

brhenryMay 25

@chris griffin @occasnltrvlr Yes, the point the Catechism is making is that to violate conscience is always a sin. If a person believes (certainly) something is sinful, even if it is not certainly in fact sinful, it would be sinful for that person to act "against their conscience."

123jussiMay 25

No contradiction ,a certain conscience can only be certain when it conforms itself to Gods laws.

chris griffinMay 25

@123jussi...you have made a distinction that is not in the CCC1790 or CCC1800. They never say a certain conscience is only certain when it conforms to God. I wish that was the case but the word "certain' means "definite or firmly believed'.

123jussiMay 25

How can you be certain when God says no? What are you certain of? A conscience must be properly informed or it is no conscience ,merely just what you decided you want to do.

occasnltrvlrMay 25

I do not take these CCC citations to mean that if one has a conscience having been seared by a hot iron that sins that, by natural law are universally prohibited, are then permissible for that person because their defective conscience permits them.
That is an unusually "liberal" interpretation of "certain judgment of his conscience."
Conscience convicts of sin but does not free from sin. It is binding, but in identifying sin it is always subordinate to natural law and explicit commands.

Malki TzedekMay 25

The science of forming and fine-tuning of the conscience is something relegated to the Church's past, tragically. It would seem that everyone is deemed to have an already accessible conscience when, in fact, what one desires to be right has now been equated with conscience. Our compasses have lost True North.