FREEDOM OF A CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE

“…the sense of conflict which many Catholics seem to have today really derives not from greater awareness but precisely from a lack of true self-awareness, from a superficial understanding of what it means to be a Catholic, from a failure to grasp the freedom and self-determination of their own Catholic position.” -Burke

This argument posed by Burke holds a very powerful position which gives a special emphasis on one’s misconception, if not misuse of his own conscience.  Bearing in mind the truth that the “Church is the home of freedom”, as Burke believes, many people fail to feel free within the Church for they feel too much bounded and obliged by the numerous laws, teachings and rubrics of the Church.  In the same manner, many find it difficult to obey and believe what the Church authority has to say if they find them going against the dictates of their own consciences.

What, then, is the cause for this faction between one’s conscience and the Church authority?  Does this imply that there are certain errors in the contents of the Church’s teaching?  Or are we to question the credibility of the person who teaches the people?  We say that in teaching about matters of faith and morals, the Church has a special role to play, and that as the Church pronounces a teaching on these matters, in a solemn proclamation, She is infallible.  The problem builds up a wall which separates conscience and Church authority on two opposing poles which can never be reconciled.  Thus, when one belongs in the Church, he feels like he is not free to obey his conscience.  And, if one is a pagan, he would never want to belong to the Church because there, he will not be free to work out the dictates of his conscience.  The question here is whether being under the authority of the Church forbids one to live by his conscience.  In other words, does the authority of the Church suspend one’s freedom (in its form as internal or external)?

The aim of this paper is an attempt to elaborate the position taken by Burke in the light of the previous discussions about conscience and freedom.  This also tries to answer certain questions which arise from Burke’s lines I have quoted above.

            Conscience, as it has been said, is the subjective norm of morality.  Hence, when one acts according to his conscience, he is judging his act subjectively.  But it should be noted that one’s conscience never creates new laws about good and evil.  Rather, it applies a general law in a specific case.  This, then, implies that the conscience is able to learn and retain a general law which it will be using in the future as it tries to assess certain events.

            The general law which one’s conscience applies to cases is a law of morality that is one and the same for all, given by one from whom all laws originate, i.e. God.  As the law says it, what is good is good; what is evil is evil.  And that can never change, nor can it be changed.  Hence, the general law which a person knows is the same general law which other persons know.  To put it in context, the general law which one’s conscience uses is the same general law which other people’s conscience uses in specific cases.  Hence, though conscience is understood as the subjective norm of morality, it is never to be misconceived with relativity.  Being subjective does not necessitate being relative.

            This implies, then, that one’s conscience can be formed, in that it is capable of comprehending the general law.  And from whom does a person rely for the formation of his conscience?  Here, the special task of the Church to teach on matters of faith and moral comes in.  Since the duty of teaching has been entrusted her, as has been in the Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, she must be faithful in doing her duty.  The Church must form the conscience of her members after the precepts given by Jesus Christ.  The members, for their side, runs to the Church for the formation of their conscience.  Hence, one does not simply form his conscience for the sake of having a true and authentic conscience.  Rather, he works on forming his conscience to have a Christian conscience, or in our context, a Catholic Conscience so that no matter what one’s status in life is, no matter what is his occupation, he will always live according to his Christian conscience.

On this regard, the Church does not compel everyone to rely solely on her for the conscience formation, for it would be like a force imposed on the members of the Church.  Rather, She invites everyone to such doing.  As for now, the question regarding the Church authority and one’s freedom needs to be addressed.

            Is being under the authority of the Church suggest a violation and loss of freedom?   No.  Just as a Filipino citizen retains his freedom though he may be under the authority of the Philippine government, so a Christian retains his freedom though he is under the care of the Church.  A Filipino citizen begins to think that he is no longer free when he loses grip of how it is to be a Filipino, when he does not understand that being a Filipino includes his obedience and adherence to the laws and decrees of the Philippine government.

The loss of freedom which many people feel when they are in the Church arise from the lack of true self-awareness, from a superficial understanding of what it means to be a Catholic.  Many people fail to recognize the role of the Church in their lives, setting the Church aside in their daily living, and considering her merely in her cultic functions.  Similarly, they might have a wrong notion of freedom, in that they thought of freedom as absolute – one which one can consider purely his own and which meddling with implies a loss, if not a violation of one’s freedom.  If one has a clear understanding of his being a member of the Church, he would never feel that he loses his freedom.  If one has a clear understanding of what is it to be in the Church he would never feel that the Church’s teachings go against his conscience.  If one’s conscience is formed in the Catholic context, he would have a never feel that what the Church tells him denies him of his freedom.  In Burke’s words, They [some Catholics] are not being forced by the authority of the Church; they are being forced by their own belief in the authority of the Church… They are in effect being forced by their own conscience!  The faction between freedom and the Church authority, then, is self inflicted.

            In the end, a person is not deprived of his freedom though he is under the authority of the Church.  Freedom, insofar as it is the power to be fully oneself – a power to realize fully our potentialities as man, cannot be confined in the notion of absence of being under barriers, and authority.  It should also not to be understood as an absolute freedom.  Accordingly, in the Church, a person does not feel that his conscience, as it is the practical judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral reality of the act he will perform, he is performing, or he had performed, dictates otherwise what the Church teaches if he has a true and clear understanding of how and what is it to be in the Church, i.e., to be a Catholic.  Hence, a part of being a Christian, inasmuch as he bears the name of Christ, is forming oneself according to the example of Christ, not just his actions but his mindset as well.  Forming one’s conscience within the context of the Church is vital for the full realization of one’s freedom under the authority of the Church.  Only after the truth about faith and morals, which the Church teaches, have been learned, the reality of freedom can be understood and attained.  Just as St. Peter said, “…and the truth will set you free.”