tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37352287.post595339253791984958..comments2023-11-03T11:11:57.989+01:00Comments on Chronicles from the Front: FOCA and the Conscience of the KingLazy Disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05839410764981702225noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37352287.post-45026402585111505482008-11-13T09:58:00.000+01:002008-11-13T09:58:00.000+01:00Dear the hornes, Thanks very much for your comme...Dear the hornes,<BR/><BR/> Thanks very much for your comment. I hope you keep visiting the blog.<BR/><BR/> Regarding your "quibbles", I wold have a few things to say, by way of reply.<BR/><BR/>1. I am not sure the second, positive part of your statement about conscience is theologically precise (here I qualify myself as one who is trained in the sacred sciences, who has written a work on Augustine's understanding of the political implications of the relationship between Christian faith and human excellence, or virtus). Augustine tells us that conscience is the voice of the true teacher. How this voice informs the will - the faculty that urges us to act - is an inexhaustible source of anthropological speculation. What is certain is that the human person needs to be attuned to the voice, and that he is never, this side of Celestial Jerusalem, perfectly so.<BR/><BR/>It is also, therefore, imprecise to say that we must have a well-formed conscience through knowledge, wisdom and reason.<BR/><BR/>It would be more precise to say that the well-formed conscience informs the way we come to and then handle what knowledge we have, and directs our reason toward true wisdom, which is intellection in charity (or intellect informed by charity, in another formulation).<BR/><BR/>Anyone deliberately espousing principles contrary to Catholic faith and morals is clearly not in possession of a well-formed conscience. A decision to support this or that political candidate is not, however, on its own, valid as evidence of a poorly-formed conscience, because such a decision may be made in light of prudential reasoning - it may be an exercise in prudential judgment. We can disagree with persons' prudential judgments, but if and when we do, we must be careful, even painstakingly so, not to give even so much as the slightest suggestion that person N may be acting in bad faith - unless, of course, we are absolutely certain that N is in bad faith, and can find no other way to achieve our purposes (this is a requirement of justice). A fortiori, therefore, we cannot pretend that an individual's exercise of prudential reason is necessarily, on its face, a window into his conscience.<BR/><BR/>2. You will recall that, in the body of the post, I wrote, "Please understand that I am not denying the objectivity of the moral order. Right is right and wrong is wrong and it is always wrong deliberately to take innocent life." I am not quite sure to what end you raise this second point, then, since I clearly and explicitly ststed my basic and substantial agreement with what appears to be the lynchpin of your argument. Could you please elaborate a little?<BR/><BR/>Finally, I agree that formation has been sorely wanting for some time.Lazy Disciplehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05839410764981702225noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37352287.post-88399024141107090192008-11-12T22:45:00.000+01:002008-11-12T22:45:00.000+01:00two quibbles about conscience:One can vote in good...two quibbles about conscience:<BR/><BR/>One can vote in good conscience for a pro-choice candidate, for proportional reasons(whether right or wrong.)<BR/><BR/>However, keep in mind two things:<BR/><BR/>1) conscience is not the arbiter of morality, but is rather that which urges us to act. we must, through knowledge, wisdom, and reason, have a well-formed conscience.<BR/><BR/>2) while one may be acting in good conscience by following a <I>wrong</I> conscience, that does not make the action right! The person's culpability is lessened, certainly. But objective moral evil is objective moral evil, whether or not the agent is ignorant or has a wrong conscience. And should be corrected.<BR/><BR/>The problem(Catholics voting contrary to church teaching) lies not entirely with the individual, but also with we catechists who have done a poor job in forming those God has put in our lives. If a Catholic does not understand that being Catholic requires a measure of fidelity to the Church, he is ill-formed. And my question to him is, why be Catholic? Why trust the Church on things like the Eucharist, Sacraments, Mary, Saints, and Purgatory, yet go against the church on Women Priests, Abortion, Homosexuality?EEHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00328529137393602725noreply@blogger.com