The myth of private conscience By Robert P. Mills The Presbyterian Layman Volume 34, Number 4 Posted May 30, 2001 “God alone is Lord of the conscience …” Like the hemorrhaging woman healed by Jesus, this sentence fragment has “suffered much under many” who have tried to doctor it. Indeed, during decades of debate concerning human sexuality and Presbyterian polity, few if any phrases from our denomination’s constitution have been invoked with more contortion or manipulation. These words are often used to validate decisions to violate a Biblical commandment or an ordination vow. They give a constitutional patina to a sentiment that, broadly paraphrased, runs something like, “I know it breaks the promise I made to God and this congregation, and I know the Bible says it’s wrong, but my conscience is clear. And since my conscience is a private matter between me and God, I can go ahead and do it and you have no grounds for questioning my decision.” Thus wrenched from its linguistic, Biblical and confessional contexts, “God alone is Lord of the conscience” implicitly presumes conscience to be a subjective, infinitely flexible arrangement between an individual and God, a private affair subject neither to public scrutiny nor to any objective, external standard. However, in looking at the word “conscience,” the Biblical understanding of the concept and the setting of this phrase in the Westminster Confession, it becomes clear that this phrase itself rebukes those who would use it to justify breaking Biblical commandments and ordination vows. ‘Knowing with’ The English word “conscience” comes from the Latin conscientia, which joins the prefix con, meaning “with,” to scientia, “to know.” Thus, as Edward Dowey notes, “Con-scientia is a knowing with, or joint knowing. It cannot remain private.” Biblically, conscience is no matter of mere personal preference. Certainly Scripture knows nothing of a private conscience. While there is no Hebrew word for “conscience,” the concept was articulated by such terms as “heart” and “soul.” For the Old Testament writers, an individual’s knowledge of right and wrong was rooted not in personal introspection but in God’s revelation to the community of faith. Definitive knowledge of good and evil came from remembering and keeping God’s commandments. And, far from being a private matter, this knowledge had been publicly revealed by God and was equally available to all. In the New Testament, “conscience” (Greek, syneidesis, “to know/see with”) occurs 30 times, mostly in Paul’s letters. In contrast to his contemporary, the Roman philosopher Seneca, Paul did not see conscience as a final arbiter. Rather, for Paul human conscience is fallible, provisional and subject to correction and judgment. “My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me” (I Cor. 4:4). Paul consistently shows conscience to be a “witness” to something (Rom. 2:15; 9:1; II Cor. 1:12; 4:2; 5:11). As Gary Meadors writes, “Conscience is not an independent authority that originates judgments. The idea of conscience as a judge or legislator in the sense of originating an opinion is a modern innovation. A witness does not create evidence but is bound to respond to evidence that exists.” And Donald Guthrie notes “the conscience, if disobeyed, can become defiled (I Cor. 8:7; 10:25). If conscience is persistently disobeyed, it becomes hardened. In I Timothy 4:2 it is spoken of as ‘seared’ among those who had been deceived by those advocating doctrines of demons.” As in Paul’s time, so there are those today whose understandings of conscience have been shaped more by secular philosophy than Scripture, whose consciences have been defiled, hardened and even seared. Confessional context Those who gathered in Westminster in the 1640s were well aware of such dangers, which they addressed in Chapter 22 of the Westminster Confession, “Of Christian Liberty, and Liberty of Conscience:” God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary to his Word, or beside it in matters of faith or worship. So that to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commandments out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience; and the requiring an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also. They who, upon pretense of Christian liberty, do practice any sin, or cherish any lust, do thereby destroy the end of Christian liberty; which is, that, being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve the Lord without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life. (Book of Confessions, 6.109-110) Betrayal and healing What some Presbyterians seem not to realize is that the sentence that begins “God alone is Lord of the conscience” continues “and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary to his Word …” Even though the complete sentence is quoted in G-1.0301(a) of the PCUSA Book of Order, those who use the opening phrase to justify their own private morality tend to end their citations with the word “conscience.” Such selective editing is not surprising. Those who would privatize conscience betray an uncritical accommodation to culture, a willing captivity to postmodernism’s fundamental assertion that there is no objective truth. This captivity in turn is but the most recent formulation of Satan’s primeval lie, “You will not surely die … you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3:4-5). In the words of Westminster, to offer to the adversary such “blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also.” Recognizing our human propensity to be misled, R. Paul Stevens writes, “Letting our conscience be our guide is usually bad advice. God is our guide … Luther rightly said, ‘My conscience is captive to the Word of God.’ It should not be captive to culture, to peer groups, to advertising …” Stevens continues, “Conscience is not a free-standing authority within us but rather dependent on and built up through capturing every thought and making it obedient to Christ (II Cor. 10:5), submitting to Word and Spirit, relying daily on the cleansing of Christ’s forgiveness and daily feeding our souls on the revelation of God’s Word.” The woman who had suffered for more than a decade at the hands of many doctors was healed the moment she touched the hem of Jesus’ robe. Jesus’ forgiveness, cleansing, and healing power are similarly available to who have been enslaved by the myth of private conscience.

Theology that Matters index Respond to this article

Home · News · PLC Publications · The Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives · History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links