 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
FORMING YOUR CONSCIENCE
DEFINITIONS
HOW TO FORM YOUR CONSCIENCE
What makes a conscience a "formed" conscience?
Catholics have a serious and lifelong obligation to form their consciences in accord with human reason and the teaching of the Church... conscience is the voice of God resounding in the human heart, revealing the truth to us and calling us to do what is good while shunning what is evil. Conscience always requires serious attempts to make sound moral judgments based on the truths of our faith. (USCCB para. #17)
Prudence enables us "to discern our true good in every circumstance and to choose the right means of achieving it" (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1806). Prudence shapes and informs our ability to deliberate over available alternatives, to determine what is most fitting to a specific context, and to act decisively. Exercising this virtue often requires the courage to act in defense of moral principles when making decisions about how to build a society of justice and peace. (USCCB para. #19)
What does conscience have to do with a Catholic vote?
[The political engagment called for by the Church is]...one shaped by the moral conviction of a well-formed conscience and focused on the dignity of every human being, the pursuit of the common good, and the protection of the weak and vulnerable. (USCCB para. #14)
What is more, we have a duty to vote guided by a well-formed conscience, and not simply on the basis of self-interest, party affiliation, or the personal charisma of any individual. (Kansas & CO p. 1)
We have a serious duty to follow the guidance of conscience. To act against the judgment of conscience when it is certain about what is good and evil has the same seriousness as disobeying God. It is important to remember however that it is possible for our conscience to be certain and at the same time incorrect about what is good and evil. (Kansas & CO p. 1)
Can two Catholics differ in conscience?
We have a serious duty to follow the guidance of conscience. To act against the judgment of conscience when it is certain about what is good and evil has the same seriousness as disobeying God. It is important to remember however that it is possible for our conscience to be certain and at the same time incorrect about what is good and evil. (Kansas & CO p. 1)
In some moral matters the use of reason allows for a legitimate diversity in our prudential judgments. Catholic voters may differ, for example, on what constitutes the best immigration policy, how to provide universal health care, or affordable housing. Catholics may even have differing judgments on the state's use of the death penalty or the decision to wage a just war. The morality of such questions lies not in what is done (the moral object), but in the motive and circumstances. Therefore, because these prudential judgments do not involve a direct choice of something evil and take into consideration various goods, it is possible for Catholic voters to arrive at different, even opposing judgments. (Kansas & CO p. 2)
What are principals that the Catholic conscience should always stick to?
Notwithstanding a possible diversity of prudential judgments, each of us should guide our decision-making on such issues by a fundamental respect for the dignity of every human person from the moment of conception to natural death. This is a non-negotiable principle. It is the foundation for both Catholic social teaching and of a just society. Respect for human dignity is the basis for the fundamental right to life. (Kansas & CO p. 2)
A correct conscience recognizes that there are some choices that always involve doing evil and which can never be done even as a means to a good end. These choices include elective abortion, euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, the destruction of embryonic human being in stem cell research, human cloning, and same-sex "marriage." Such acts are judged to be intrinsically evil, that is, evil in and of themselves, regardless of our motives or the circumstances. (Kansas & CO p. 2)
Other examples of choices that always involve doing evil would be racial discrimination and the production and use of pornography. These actions offend the fundamental dignity of the human person. (Kansas & CO p. 2)
Concerning choices that are intrinsically evil, Catholics may not promote or even remain indifferent to them. (Kansas & CO p. 2)
Those who knowingly, willingly, and directly support public policies or legislation that undermine fundamental moral principles cooperate with evil. (USCCB para. #31)
What's the conscientious vote when all candidates hold (at least one) position of intrinsic evil?
Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter's intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate's opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity. (USCCB para. #34)
When all candidates hold a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, the conscientious voter faces a dilemma. The voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate or, after careul deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate deemed less likely to advance such a morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other authentic human goods. (USCCB para. #36)
In making these decisions, it is essential for Catholics to be guided by a well-formed conscience that recognizes that all issues do not carry the same moral weight and that the moral obligation to oppose intrinsically evil acts has a special claim on our consciences and our actions. (USCCB para. #38)
Because we have a moral obligation to vote, deciding not to vote at all is not ordinarily an acceptable solution to this dilemma. So, when there is no choice of a candidate that avoids supporting intrinsically evil actions, especially elective abortion, we should vote in such a way as to allow the least harm to innocent human life and dignity. We would not be acting immorally therefore if we were to vote for a candidate who is not totally acceptable in order to defeat one who poses an even greater threat to human life and dignity. (Kansas & Co p. 3)