Katie van Schaijik

What is conscience 5

Mar. 25, 2010, at 5:12pm

See below for the 5th and last part of the comments elicited by Katie's post on Conscience

Katie van Schaijik • Mar 27, 2010 - 9:29 am

Father, in reply to your last:

1)  Yes.  Appropriating the achievements of modernity most definitely involves correcting its aberrations.  And there are an awful lot of those in modernity. 

3)  I don’t consider CW’s work a development of doctrine.  I agree with you about its shortcomings on several points. 

4)  No disagreement there.

5)  I am all for enforcement of Canon Law.  I only meant I wouldn’t be satisfied with only that.  And I do not want to re-establish an ethos of law enforcement, which goes hand in hand with an ethos of legalism and paternalism.  I think persons thrive best when laws are kept to the essential minimum, and, as you say above, we are formed to be prudent.

6)  I agree with you on the general point.  (I withhold agreement regarding its application to CW, since I do not know enough about his view of modesty.)

frangelo • Mar 27, 2010 - 6:03 pm


Nice to see that for the most part we agree.

5) What I meant was that in regard to “reigning things in a bit” I would be satisfied with just enforcing the existing canons.  I am not looking for a reactive police state in the Church, nor do I have any affinity for the philosophies behind them.

That would mean we basically agree on all points!

Katie van Schaijik • Mar 27, 2010 - 8:55 pm

That is nice, though I fear it will be short lived.  I mean short lived if I ever manage to make good on my promise to answer your critique of CW.  Even then, though, I have good hope that, on the whole, we will find ourselves generally much more in agreement than otherwise.

frangelo • Mar 28, 2010 - 11:20 am

Bring it on!  ;-)

Steve B • Apr 27, 2010 - 3:21 pm

Hi Katie,

I realize from your most recent post on TPP that you are either currently occupied with, or preparing to give, a public presentation. 

I’ve already offered prayers that all goes exceptionally well for you in your talk, and that you have safe and uneventful travels (if that is required)....

Ever since our very animated discussion on this topic of “conscience” concluded about a month ago (That long ago?  How time flies!), I’ve still been digging deeper on the subject.  Last night, I came across a VERY interesting article, which shed quite a bit of light on the matter for yours truly.

The article (link below) describes “two camps” of belief within Catholicism wrt conscience, which I think makes considerable sense of why you, Jules, and I came to such loggerheads on this topic.  When you do finally have free time again, please give the relatively brief article a read, and let me know what you think.

Anyway, here’s the link to the article: 

Perhaps, with the enlightenment of this article, we can continue our discussion of “conscience”, albeit each from the perspective of our own “camp”, respectively?

As the authors of this article infer, perhaps there is a need within Catholicism for these “two camps” of belief to work harder toward greater harmony?  I hope that we can continue further discussions which might aid in that lofty goal….

Take care and God bless,

Steve B
Plano, TX

Stay informed

Latest comments

  • Re: The Weary World Rejoices
  • By: Gary Gibson
  • Re: Assessment Run Amok
  • By: Devra Torres
  • Re: Assessment Run Amok
  • By: deb
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Gary Gibson
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Some power struggles are good and necessary
  • By: Rhett Segall
  • Re: Cutting ties
  • By: Leonie
  • Re: Cutting ties
  • By: Leonie

Latest active posts

Reading circles