A Vague and Harmful Pedagogical Approach
The Church does teach that one ought to follow their conscience. Yet this statement is as vague and meaningful as saying “be good” without defining the good. Its sentimental and vacuous if content or substance doesn’t accompany it. In many ways the statement avoids anything concrete, and is pedagogically aimless and enabling. I am writing this because I have been ordained for 10 years now, and when I run up against dissent from within the Church I often encounter those who tout this phrase “follow your conscience.” I hear it in discussion, read it on twitter and hear it as a blanket rejection of a well put together explanation of why contraception is sinful to use. This phrase is often used to unintentionally mask a type of self-will or relativism, and recently I heard it used to justify abortion. Keep in mind, Lucifer quotes truths in scripture in a twisted attempt to deceive our Lord. In this sense, using the truth of the statement can indeed be done in such a manner that misleads others. Nonetheless, I would argue that behind this relativism or nominalism, is actually a lack of faith in Jesus. I will explain why I believe that, but first I’d like to outline the problem.
As a seminarian and younger priest I was zealous about teaching the Church’s teaching on contraception with the Theology of the Body. I noted something peculiar when teaching St. John Paul II’s theology around this subject: those who had never heard of the first Winnipeg Statement easily accepted the teaching, but those who had, really struggled. Their objection was a blanket, “I thought we were allowed to follow our conscience.” Most of those who had heard about the first Winnipeg Statement hadn’t heard about the second, where conscience was defined a bit more practically on this matter.