Should I follow the Church teaching or my conscience?

July 30, 2023

In the first reading of today, we have God praising Solomon for asking for “an understanding mind to (be) able to discern between good and evil…”  And yet if we remember the Adam and Eve story, we find there that God forbids Adam and Eve from eating of “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil”. (Genesis 2:16-17).  Isn’t that strange? But perhaps not so strange if we remember that the Bible is an articulation of the evolving experience of God that the Israelites experienced on their pilgrimage.  And because the BIble is the story of this pilgrimage, Christians can rightly give priority to the later parts of the Bible, i.e the New Testament, over the moral and other teachings of the Old Testament.

According to Biblical scholars, the first five books of the Bible (which include the Adam and Eve story) were probably written around the time when the Jews were just beginning to become a nation, a chosen people. And as we know in modern days when there is a jingoistic nationalistic atmosphere that prioritizes patriotism over everything else, then inconvenient questions about what is right and wrong are not appreciated, and even seen as treason. Another example of this evolution of moral understanding can be seen if we note that in the Book of Deuteronomy (the fifth book of the BIble), the Israelites were permitted (even encouraged?) to kill and rape women and children if the opposing group refused to surrender (Dt. 20:10-14) - something that a thinking Israelite may have questioned even at that time. And we can notice that after the books of Joshua and Judges (6^th and 7^th books in the Bible), there is no such rapacious and murderous teaching found in the Bible. By the time of Solomon, (Books of Kings which were the 11^th and 12^th books in the Bible), the Jews were already an established nation with a king, and during such times, it was perhaps less threatening if people reflected for themselves on what was right and wrong.

 

What is also interesting to note, when we read the entire story of Solomon in the Book of Kings, is that despite his famed wisdom, and God-given ability to discern between good and evil, and his great accomplishment of building the Jewish Temple, his story as recounted in the Bible informs us that he ended up as being one who committed many many sins as per the understanding of the Jewish religion at that time. For example, one of his greatest sins was that he built temples to the gods of his many wives, and so promoted idolatry.  It is interesting that today if a ruler did build temples for the various religions of his subjects, we would have praised him for his tolerance and secularism, a mark of a wise king like Akbar the Great in India, who respected the religions of all his subjects.    

 

So it is possible that Solomon’s God given gift of wisdom, of knowing how to discern between good and evil, allowed him to take actions that did not fit into the notions of right and wrong of the Judaic religion of his time - acts which in hindsight could be considered as wise acts that were far ahead of his time, and that is why even today Solomon is referred to commonly as the epitome of wisdom.  

 

So, should we strive to have an understanding mind that can discern between good and evil?  Or should we just obey what the Church teaches? What should a good Catholic do when there is a situation where what we believe is right/wrong does not harmonize with the current Church teaching on a particular issue?

It would seem to me that it probably doesn’t really make much sense to accept that something is wrong just because a religious authority like the Church says it is, because we do know that Church teachings have changed over the centuries, such that what was not considered wrong at one point in history is considered wrong at a later point in Church history, or the other way around.  For example, keeping slaves was not considered morally wrong in Paul’s times as is evident in his letter to Philemon where he does not decry the practice of slavery per se, but advises the latter to treat his slave with kindness. Today, of course, the Church considers the keeping of slaves as morally repugnant.  

Apart from this there are also Church teachings that no more hold sway, even though they have not been officially revoked. For example, there was a Pontifical Commission appointed by Pope Paul VI himself, consisting of bishops, cardinals, theologians, physicians etc. who came out with a report (supported by 64 out of 69 members) that concluded that the use of artificial birth control methods was NOT intrinsically evil and that Catholic couples should be allowed to decide for themselves about the methods of birth control to be employed. Despite that the Pope went ahead and issued the Encyclical, Humanae Vitae, that said that using artificial means of birth control was morally wrong. Even so and despite the Pope’s official teaching, 14 national bishops’ conferences officially declared that Catholic couples could disagree with this teaching. It also seems quite obvious that the vast majority of lay Catholic couples have in practice rejected this teaching. After all it would be quite naive to believe that the reality of most educated Catholic couples having one, two or even no children, is because they are all using natural forms of birth control.  And if we accept the Catholic teaching that the ‘sensum fidelium’ or ‘sense of the faithful’ is also a source of truth, then we would have to take this practice of Catholic couples all over the world as also a valid input in deciding whether the teaching in Humanae Vitae is to be supported at all. Of course, just because almost everybody is doing something, doesn’t make it right, but when that practice is supported by 14 bishops conferences in some way or the other, and by 92.5% of the Pontifical Commission itself, then one has to give much credence to this sensus fidelium of Catholic couples too. Most importantly, it might interest and surprise many Catholics to know that neither the Humanae Vitae nor any other moral teaching of the church has been declared to be infallible.  

So something is not right or wrong because the Church (or some religious teaching) says it is right or wrong, because even religious authorities can make mistakes.  Jesus, who was clearly not a priest in the Jewish religion of which he considered himself a part, clearly demonstrated this repeatedly in his life and teachings. Most notable among these was his teaching with regard to one of the most important moral laws of the Judaism of his time, namely the law of the Sabbath, when he insisted that the religious authorities of his time had made a significant mistake in understanding and interpreting this law. However, since we too as individuals or as groups, like the official Church, can make mistakes or choose to think something is right or wrong just because it suits us, religious authorities offer guidance to help us determine what is right and wrong - and that is extremely helpful in many cases.  But this guidance of the Church, like that of all religious authorities, grows and evolves over time, as our own history shows.

So that brings us to the question: When do we follow our own CONSCIENCE?  The  Catechism of the Catholic Church (paragraph 1782) clearly gives primacy to the individual’s conscience when it teaches that each human being "has the right to act according to his/her conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. S/He must not be forced to act contrary to his/her conscience. Nor must s/he be prevented from acting according to his/her conscience, especially in religious matters".  However, since one’s conscience is quite likely to bend according to our own desires/convenience, the Church teaches that we need to follow our formed conscience.   

This does not mean just doing what one feels is right (as is often the position taken by many today). Doing what one believes is right is to be grounded in a formed conscience which is considered to have two aspects. First of all, it is a conscience that has been ‘informed’ - which means it is based on a diligent exploration of the various sources related to the issue at hand, including for Catholics at least, the Church’s teaching on the matter, but also what we can learn from various other sources of knowledge that are available to us (i.e. the sciences, both positive and social etc). Secondly, a formed conscience is one that has been ‘formed’ by the values that Jesus espoused. The second aspect is crucially important to ensure that we do not use the ‘excuse’ of following one’s conscience to just do what is convenient to ourselves or our group or what is the current politically correct thing to do.  And knowing what Jesus’ values are, requires a careful understanding of the Gospel stories, rather than just a devotional and blind approach to Biblical passages.

But just as there is the danger in following our ‘conscience’ without taking the trouble to fulfil the requirements of a ‘formed conscience’ there is also the danger that is evident in those who justify their choices by saying something like: “Father, told me it was alright.” or even “the Church says it is OK”.  The latter danger of blindly following what we are taught, rather than taking up the burden of responsibility for our moral choices, is equally unacceptable, and is actually the choice made by hundreds of thousands of believers who kill and harm others in the name of a particular religion or religious teaching. And this kind of blind and irresponsible obedience is something that is found among followers of all the major religions or ideologies of the world, including in Catholicism and other Christian groups.

It is, perhaps, the case that many of us prefer the ‘peace’ that comes from handing over responsibility of our moral choices to some religious authority, rather than the burden of having to choose for ourselves. So, we need to ask ourselves whether we are willing to take the responsibility of acting out of a formed conscience, instead of just doing what we feel like or putting the responsibility of our choices on the clergy and the Church teaching. 

First Reading: First Kings 3: 5, 7-12

At Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night, and God said, “Ask what I should give you.”  And Solomon said:  "O Lord my God, you have made your servant king in place of my father David, although I am only a little child; I do not know how to go out or come in. And your servant is in the midst of the people whom you have chosen, a great people so numerous they cannot be numbered or counted. Give your servant, therefore, an understanding mind to govern your people, able to discern between good and evil, for who can govern this great people of yours?”

It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this. God said to him, “Because you have asked this and have not asked for yourself long life or riches or for the life of your enemies but have asked for yourself understanding to discern what is right, I now do according to your word. Indeed, I give you a wise and discerning mind; no one like you has been before you, and no one like you shall arise after you.

 

Second Reading: Romans 8: 28-30

We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family. And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified.

 

Gospel: Matthew 13: 44-52

“The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found and hid; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field. “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls; on finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it.  “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and caught fish of every kind; when it was full, they drew it ashore, sat down, and put the good into baskets but threw out the bad. So, it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous and throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be       weeping and gnashing of teeth. 

“Have you understood all this?” They answered, “Yes.” And he said to them, "Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like the   master of a household who brings out of his treasure what isnew and what is old.”