The Law of Conscience

It would appear that the most fundamental difference and distinction which contrasts man with all other species of animals is the faculty of complex reason and, particularly, conscience. As the character Hamlet stated in Shakespeare’s famous play:

“What is a man, if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? a beast, no more. Sure, he that made us with such large discourse, looking before and after, gave us not that capability and god-like reason to fust [mold or decay] in us unused.” Hamlet: Act IV Scene IV

A dog and a human being possess differing degrees of reflective capacity. A dog will appear to look guilty when he has been scolded for soiling the carpet in the house, knowing that he has displeased his master. This might appear to be a rudimentary demonstration of conscience. Similarly, this same dog will enjoy the praise it receives for pleasing his master, and demonstrate contentment and ease of mind. However, these appear to be learned responses to given situations and do not speak to the righteousness or unrighteousness, within the dog’s mind, of the things it did. The dog is simply responding to the evaluation his master has placed upon these actions. Therefore we conclude that a dog’s responses are at the level of thought that can be trained. The animal does not inherently possess a moral or ethical component, although animals may be predisposed to gentleness when they have not been conditioned by threats or necessity to be defensive or aggressive. Man, however does inherently possess a moral or ethical component which underlies his conscience. Further, man is able to reason and articulate in great detail “looking before and aft with such large discourse” about the moral and ethical considerations of a situation and to order his conduct accordingly. Empathetic reflection is the fundamental cornerstone of man’s relation to man in all the pursuits and activities of life. Conscience is thereby informed by the way one would be treated by others or by the outcomes one would wish for oneself.

The faculties of reason and conscience must be effectively used if man is to live up to the dignity of what it means to be human, created in the image of God and a reflection of his character likeness. However, as it presently stands man is in a continual state of tension between what he ought, ought not, can, and cannot do and say. The mechanism of conscience is at one and the same time his curse and his blessing – both accusing him of wrong and commending him of right. Roman 2: 15 This shows the work of… law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing… To complicate matters, man’s perceptions of right and wrong are often formed by time, custom, social pressure, misinformation, the pressures of necessity, and illusion. The question presents itself: What is truly right or truly wrong?

What is Conscience? – an Innate Mechanism

Let us define the word conscience. The word conscience means:
The inner sense of what is right or wrong in one’s thoughts, conduct, motives, and actions.
An innate mechanism that regulates thought and action in harmony with ethical and moral principles

We speak of such things as “having a clear conscience”; “violating one’s conscience”; “pricking one’s conscience”; “doing something in good conscience”; “having a guilty conscience”; “examining one’s conscience”.

Even as the law of gravity is a fact of existence, so is the law of conscience. Man has one whether he likes it or not. Many would prefer to ignore the power of conscience as they exert their will in opposition to its innate dictates. Often, what can be gained by way of pleasure becomes a sufficiently powerful counterweight so as to override the restraining or correcting power of conscience. In fact, some will even endeavor to revise their personal legal code so as to train their consciences to respond to the “new laws” they have written for themselves.

The history of the human race can, in a sense, be viewed as a series of events that have been the result of the manner in which human conscience has been educated, heeded, or violated, ignored, and disregarded. All human activity is, or at least should be, scrutinized by the doorkeeper of conscience. The system of values that one maintains will have everything to do with what is allowed to pass through the doors and gain entry into the activity of the lives of individuals and society. Therefor the system of values with which the conscience is educated is fundamental to the quality of the experiences of life in general.

Although there are certain more or less universal ethics to which most people give their assent, there is also a great deal of subjectivity in the consciences of many. Consciences can be educated in a variety of ways regardless of whether the education is correct. The result will be that an individual’s conscience will make responses based on how it was educated. A person’s conscience can be vindicated or violated as it responds to the body of information that constitutes its education, even though that education may be erroneous. The point here is that the conscience, as an innate mechanism, is working but that the information upon which its operation is based may be wrong, thus creating either a rejection of what is ultimately good or right, or an acceptance of what is ultimately bad or wrong.

And here we come to our central question: What constitutes the body of information (or truth) that provides the “food” which will properly regulate a functioning human conscience?

Perception and Reality

From the day we are born, the life each of us experiences is based on the information we receive in the succession of passing days, weeks, months, and years. Our cognitive faculties are called upon to operate using any and all of the information that our senses assimilate. But more that this, the cumulative perceptions of the past that have been assimilated by our social contexts are in turn transmitted to us unless they are challenged for their basis in truth. For example, it may be that a given culture has maintained for generations certain religious customs that were handed down through mythical stories. A person growing up in this cultural environment may either adopt a custom and continue to pass it on to the next generation, or question the custom for a reasonable basis in truth or ultimate efficacy.

If an individual is not inclined to inquire into the truthfulness of certain social and cultural perceptions, the perceptions will continue. But if one is inclined to measure perceptions against reality, truth will be given an opportunity to be approximated. It is worth noting that, even when long held cultural perceptions are challenged for their truthfulness by an individual, a dilemma arises: Should the untrue perceptions be challenged at the expense of the cohesion of the larger cultural community? In other words, should traditions be repudiated when these very traditions are found to be hindrances to truth and clear perception – the real underpinnings of society. In Matt. 9:17 Jesus said:
“Men do not put new wine into old wine skins, or else the new wine will burst the skins and be spilled, and the skins will perish. But new wine must be put into new skins and both will be preserved.”

To state the matter in its broadest terms, societies and world cultures will undergo dramatic metamorphosis in proportion as faulty, long held norms and perceptions are challenged and realigned with truthfulness. This very point is emphasized in Hebrews 12: 27:
“Once more I (God) will shake not the earth(society) only, but also heaven (the ruling powers). And this word, Yet once more, signifies the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made (by man), that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.”

The Conscience is Inherently Moral

The human conscience is central to this discussion. The conscience is an innate mechanism that operates on the basis of the perceptions the mind creates out of information and experience. If the perceptions the mind creates out of information and experience are accurate, then the moral conscience will stand a better chance of making good decisions. We use the expression “moral conscience” because the very notion of conscience implies morality, otherwise the word conscience has no meaning.

When someone is “educated” to believe that something is wrong (for example, eating meat on Friday) their conscience will register a response of guilt if they were to eat meat on that day. The conscience, in this instance has been socialized, even though it states nowhere in the Bible that eating meat on a specified day is wrong. It only became “wrong” because someone or some group said that it is.

From the time of childhood we respond to the evaluation that parents place upon certain actions and take these as cues as to the “morality” of these actions? And further, as children grow up to be adults they continue to respond to the evaluation that group and societal norms and customs place upon certain actions and practices?

The matter is clearer when a law, the keeping of which is known to be compatible with the preservation of our nature, is violated. For example, (under ordinary circumstances) to steal something from another person violates the rights of that person as well as degrades our own integrity.

The important thing is to make distinctions between right and wrong that are not distorted by misinformation, faulty personal and social perceptions, or the pressures of necessity. Many of our personal perceptions and the actions resulting from them come as a result of our social contexts that hand things down to us as traditions and “norms”. For example, one might say that if you are a Roman Catholic you should confess your sins to priest at least once a year or else God will be displeased and it will affect your eternal salvation. Based on this information the conscience, upon failing to go to confession, may register a guilty response even though there is no Scriptural basis of truth in this practice. Martin Luther endeavored to show that repentance to God alone, and not to a priest, more closely approximates the truth upon which the conscience is to operate.

Obeying the Conscience is Essential

Nevertheless, in spite of faulty sources of information, the conscience is a good thing. We all need to be regulated by our conscience. In many situations the problem is not with the conscience but with the information the conscience is given to work with, and how firmly that information receives a kind of “legal” endorsement to which the conscience feels responsible.

We should never ask a person to speak or act against his conscience, but rather should endeavor to provide reliable information with which the conscience can function to full advantage. The conscience of an individual is inseparably linked to character. To violate one’s conscience is to inflict damage to good character. Many well intentioned people who act according to conscience make choices that are not based on accurate information, but are acting based on the only kind of information they possess. A Catholic may abstain from eating meat on Friday with the intention of being pleasing to God. To have eaten meat on Friday would be the same, in their own conscience, as disobeying God. This would create a violation of conscience which would in turn undermine the person’s character unless steps were taken to redress the “wrong”. This is key! Good character is only maintained by two courses of action:
By doing what is right (or what one thinks to be right).
By sincerely acknowledging what was done wrong (or thought to be wrong) and correcting it.
If a person does something they think is wrong, even if it actually isn’t, it will undermine their character unless the “wrong” is corrected, unless better information is received upon which to base the operation of conscience.

In the case of the example we are using, upon learning that God never required anyone to abstain from eating meat on Friday, the individual could relinquish this practice without any violation of conscience whatever, and the person’s character would in no way have been undermined. The old idea has died to us, and no longer has any power over our mind or conscience.

Conscience: An Endowment from God

In Proverbs 20: 27 we seem to see man’s conscience as a fundamental endowment from the Creator.

The spirit of man is the candle of the LORD, searching all the inward parts of the heart.

It is from the LORD. It is the spirit of man in the sense that it is the force that exercises a searching or discretionary quality as a prerequisite for action, or for the correction of actions that were improperly taken.

Because the conscience is the gatekeeper of the heart, the very core of the human being, to disregard it would be to destroy the essence of one’s humanity. This in turn would extend destructive influences to others with whom that person would come into contact. Every time we do something which we either know to be wrong, or think to be wrong, and ignore the voice of conscience, we are in fact destroying ourselves as human beings. The more we ignore our conscience the more easily we become insensitive and hardened to its call. In 1 Timothy 4: 2 this is called “having the conscience seared with a hot iron (rendered insensitive) .”

The important thing is to obey the voice of conscience even if it is misinformed. However, every human being should be motivated by a desire to have a clearer view on all subjects in order to maximize the quality of life for all.

God’s Provision for Man’s Conscience

The Bible highlights the fundamental aspects that relate to man’s conscience. In the Genesis story of the Garden of Eden, Adam violated his conscience when he disobeyed God. He damaged himself and brought upon himself and his posterity a compromised legacy which culminated in death, and still does to this day.

The Bible also shows how man has tried to redress the violations of conscience before God, to whom he feels ultimately responsible. Not only in the Bible, but in many world religions, sacrificial offerings have been offered to God as substitution for the transgressor. These have been called “sin offerings”. These represent efforts on the part man to make amends and give the offender, or transgressor another opportunity to be pleasing to God. They are, in other words, psychological adjustments. Without these adjustments, which we must all make in some way, we would not be able to maintain a reasonable level of mental health, for it is in the very nature of our being to answer the voice of conscience so that we can carry on with living. Those who do not answer the voice of conscience in some way slowly destroy the essence of what it means to be human, as well as erode their mental (and even physical) health.

The Bible, however, presents us with a dilemma. It tells us that no matter what mankind does, the fundamental source of sin (moral weakness) and cause of death in us cannot be rectified by our own efforts. We can work as hard as we can to be “good people” all of our lives, and answer to the voice of conscience to the best of our ability, but the source of the problem lies with our first parents, particularly Adam, and what all have inherited from them.

Jesus Atones for Adam’s Sin

The Bible’s presentation of the entire matter is that only God can devise a way for mankind to regain moral and psychological balance, which will also result in physical balance. God has made an arrangement for the payment of the penalty of Adam’s transgression and consequent violation of conscience. The penalty for Adam was death which we, as Adam’s children, experience to this day. It may be difficult for us to fully understand just how one perfect man (Jesus) can pay the price for the guilt of another perfect man (Adam), but this is the arrangement the Bible presents to us. Accordingly, in Romans 5: 12 &19 we read: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men… For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”

The result for those who accept this arrangement in faith has deep psychological implications. The book of Hebrews explains this. In chapter 9:14 we read: “How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” Again, in Hebrews 10: 22 we read: “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled (by virtue of the merit inherent in Christ’s sacrifice) from an evil conscience…”

No matter how any may try to evade responsibility to the laws that govern human behavior it cannot be done with impunity. God is the great law giver who has built into our nature a conscience which, by design, His law is intended to regulate. God has also provided a legal way of escape from death and the condemnation of a consciousness of evil (or an evil conscience). The story of the Bible, from Adam to Christ, is the story of the cause and the solution to man’s apparently irreconcilable condemnation of conscience.

It is because of God’s arrangement to meet the requirements of His own law, through Jesus’ willing sacrifice, that any can say: “Therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace (both legal and mental) with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Romans 5:1 This opportunity will be offered to all in due time when God’s Kingdom shall be fully established on earth, and then all will be able to “have a conscience void of offence toward God and man.” Acts 24: 16

All will experience what it really means to be a living, happy, human being
when mankind as a whole is finally restored to mental, moral, and physical balance. “Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on Earth, even as it is done in Heaven”!