A reader writes:
I was told by a Catholic that he was free to disagree with Church teaching by virtue of the "Doctine of Conscience" He doesn’t believe that missing mass is a mortal sin, and for a lapsed Catholic to take communion etc.
I am not yet a Catholic, and am being confused by individuals who are active practicing Catholics, but appear to be of the cafeteria type. Am I out to lunch and uncharitable?
Nope.
Here is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says:
1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.
1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin." In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.
1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.
Your friend clearly has an erroneous notion of conscience. Whether he is culpable for this or not is a matter that we should not attempt to judge, but he has an erroneous notion nonetheless.
Your friend apparently knows what the Church holds regarding certain situations (i.e., that it is gravely sinful to miss Mass on Sundays without an excusing cause, that lapsed Catholics should not go to Communion without confession first) and is wilfully disregarding this. It seems from what you have said as if he has taken little trouble to investigate the firmness with which the Church holds these points or that he knows they are firm but wilfully disregards this fact. This means that he may be in a situation where he is culpable for his error on these points, though this cannot be said with certainty.
What is certain is that your friend is wrong and needs to re-think these issues with greater attention to the teaching and governing authority that Christ bestowed upon the Church:
"I give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heave"–Jesus Christ, Matthew 16:18
One notes that even if the Church were wrong on these points, the friend is not claiming that it would be wrong to attend Mass on Sunday, which would really making missing it obeying his conscience.
He is rather in the position of a Christian who thinks that an idol is a chunk of wood, and therefore there can be nothing wrong with eating food offered to it — and therefore does not cease to eat after someone points out that the food was offered to idols.
“If your brother is being hurt by what you eat, your conduct is no longer in accord with love. Do not because of your food destroy him for whom Christ died.”
Anyone who considers himself well enough catechised to throw around a fifty cent phrase “doctrine of conscience” ought to be well enough catechised to know the basics of the faith.
To which I say, “The Church truly is a refuge of sinners.” That’s my polite way of saying, “shame on him!”
Peace,
Kelly