Comments on: Conscience: Accurate or Precise?

By: johnboy316

johnboy316 — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 03:32:00 +0000

As I warned, no profound insight here.

Ok, now you're warning everyone. Nice.

J/K! haha.

By: Ben Douglass

Ben Douglass — Sat, 20 Jan 2007 08:43:00 +0000

Iacobus,

That’s a shame. You’ll miss the TFP bagpipes and the rabbi who rails against sodomy (”they want to turn to Holy Land into the HOMO LAND!”) and blows the shofar. On the bright side, you won’t have to listen to all the smarmy republicans expatiate about our great pro-life President.

By: Erasmus

Erasmus — Sat, 20 Jan 2007 07:22:00 +0000

How is this for another analogy when speaking of conscience...

If one use a radio that still has a dial versus the digital type one from time to time needs to tune the original station in even if he has not touched the tuner.

The station is still playing the same programing, but sometimes it does not come in as clear without the readjustment.

By: Clara

Clara — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 23:53:00 +0000

Conscience is certainly an interesting issue. A couple of years ago, a law professor from the University of San Diego wrote a piece of St. Thomas More called “The Conundrums of Conscience” (unfortunately I can’t find an online version to link to) exploring this topic with regards to perhaps the most famous saint to plead “conscience” as his excuse for defying (civil) authority.

The author finds it noteworthy that the saint had no qualms about persecuting Protestants that also pleaded “conscience” as an excuse for defying the one true Church. This crowd probably won’t find that so difficult to explain. But we might be a bit more perplexed by a couple of other details of his life.

First of all, unlike St. John Fisher, he refused to explain in detail his reasons for opposing the King. “It’s a matter of conscience” was more or less all he would say about the matter even over the course of his long imprisonment and eventually execution. Why not be more explicit, if he was convinced that all rightly ordered consciences would point to the same conclusion that he had reached?

Secondly, he never tried to persuade his family to follow in his footsteps. Most of his relations took the required oath to the King and were thus spared all the persecution that Thomas More endured… and he never attempted to talk them out of it. That would be strange behavior if he believed that they would be risking their eternal souls in the act. Did he think for some reason that it might not be wrong for them even though it was wrong for him?

I have no definite answers here, but I think the questions are interesting.

By: drake

drake — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:46:00 +0000

Good point and well put.

I just wish opus dei were more accurate in fully describing what they do.

By: Iacobus

Iacobus — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 16:00:00 +0000

Ben,

Probably not, I imagine. I live in the area, but I’ll be working, unfortunately.

By: Ben Douglass

Ben Douglass — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 11:25:00 +0000

Speaking of abortion, will the Cornell Society for a Good Time be represented at the March for Life this Monday?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 09:25:00 +0000

Film Reveals Growing Callousness to Abortion

By: mater marci

mater marci — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 03:34:00 +0000

The abortion movement is awash in this false concept of the conscience. Planned Parenthood brochures assure the unwitting pregnant woman that if her conscience doesn’t tell her abortion is wrong, then it isn’t wrong for her, and won’t bother her later. Scary. Very good analogy; thanks for sharing, Ambrosius!

By: Tobias Petrus

Tobias Petrus — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 03:06:00 +0000

Amen, Tim! It might even be better to say that this protestant (no “pseudo-” about it) elevation of the individual’s conscience — a practical idolatry — is what urged Nietzsche on to his formal atheism. “If I, the individual believer, am the ultimate judge of what is or is not scriptural, Christian, etc., why should I bother with the Scripture, Christ, etc., in the first place? I’m already behaving as though I am the ultimate arbiter, so why shouldn’t I openly proclaim and enjoy this privilege?” Nietzsche was the son of a Lutheran minister, and he may have absorbed more than he expected from this background. Additionally, Lutheranism exalted the will over the rational intellect, a trend that German philosophy and ideology soon picked up and stripped of residual Christian traces.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 00:33:00 +0000

I once tried to convince a protestant friend that his conscience was not properly formed (concerning specific issues of faith). He couldn’t understand the concept of this, clinging to the idea that because his conscience was his, it was sacrosanct and beyond critique. This pseudo-Nietzschean elevation of self in its own right permeates protestantism, even its most devout (stubborn) adherents, and sadly, society at large. A poorly formed conscience will lead one nowhere but the infernal regions.

By: jhughesdunphy

jhughesdunphy — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 21:16:00 +0000

Reality is not whatever one perceives it to be, but one must align his or her concepts of reality with what really and truly is there!!! Your clock analogy ticks clearly with the times.
One reality worth checking out these days is what the most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass really is and not what we feature it to be.
Pope Benedict XVI is leading the restoration of this holiest of prayers, as we speak, and it seems he feels that our worship of God in the Mass leaves much to be desired in the Latin rite. For more on the Mass etc. and Pope Benedict XVI: check out...

http:www.theorthodoxromancatholic.
com