The public health measures put in place in Australia in response to COVID-19 have prompted a range of responses from Christians. In discussions about how to respond the ideas of ‘conscience’ and ‘freedom (or liberty) of conscience’ often come up. In this four-part series, the GiST team takes a fresh look at conscience and liberty of conscience, and asks the question, “Are they Christian ideas?’
In this, the second part of this series, we ask the question…
How did ‘conscience’ and ‘liberty of conscience’ change in modern times?
Conscience
A significant development in the idea of conscience came with Immanuel Kant in the 18th century. Kant saw conscience as the final arbiter of moral truth for the individual; this is a considerable change from seeing God’s Word as the final arbiter of moral truth.[1] Consistent with this, rather than conscience simply being a witness to God’s requirements and an ‘urger’ towards the good, which ought in certain circumstances to be put in its place, conscience came to be seen as in authority over the individual.[2]
Liberty of conscience
Liberty of conscience became particularly important in light of the European wars of the 16th & 17th centuries, in which religion was (at least) a justifying factor. Religious freedom in society (originally meaning toleration of Christian denominations other than the national one) was argued for on the basis of liberty of conscience. John Locke was a key ‘hinge point’: any objection to the doctrine of toleration, he wrote,
“…would be settled if the law of toleration were once so settled that all churches were obliged to lay down toleration as the foundation of their own liberty and that liberty of conscience is every man’s natural right equally belonging to dissenters as to themselves: and that nobody ought to be compelled in matters of religion either by law or force.”[3]
Such toleration was later extended to Roman Catholics and atheists, on the same basis. Thomas Jefferson put it this way:
“But our rulers can have authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god.”[4]
Liberty of conscience in modern thought then is no longer simply the freedom extended by Christians to one another in the church so that each one may act in accordance with even an uninformed conscience, nor just freedom from government interference so that Christians can believe and practise Christianity according to God’s Word. Rather, liberty of conscience in modern thought is freedom from government interference so that all people in society can obey the dictates of their conscience, in all matters religious and moral, provided they do no harm to others. Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) puts it this way:
“Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion”, a right which is “subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”[5]
Conscience, liberty of conscience, and Christianity
Is conscience a Christian idea?
If what is meant by that question is, “Is conscience an idea we find in the Bible?” the answer is most definitely ‘yes’. As outlined above conscience is an important New Testament idea. The current renewed focus on conscience is a welcome development.
However there are important differences between the Bible’s idea of conscience and modern ideas of it. Conscience in the Bible is a ‘witness bearer’ to God’s requirements, urging us towards them. In contrast to the modern idea, conscience as understood in the Bible is not an authority in and of itself, since conscience can be wrong. Conscience must therefore be submitted to the authority of God’s Word and instructed by it.[6]
Is liberty of conscience a Christian idea?
If what is meant by that question is, ‘Is liberty of conscience an idea we find in the Bible?’ the answer is ‘yes, but…’ As outlined above, liberty of conscience is dealt with in the New Testament. However the New Testament treatment of liberty of conscience is quite limited and the idea significantly different from the modern political idea of it. It is true that the biblical idea of liberty of conscience is part of the philosophical context out of which the modern political idea grew, but political thinkers have extended liberty of conscience well beyond the New Testament idea of it.
That is not to say the modern political concept of liberty of conscience has nothing to recommend it; on the contrary! But it is to say that it is not the same idea that we find in the New Testament.
[1] Christopher Ash, ‘Pure Joy: Rediscover your conscience’, p.193-195. Oliver O’Donovan traces the theological development of this change (O’Donovan, ‘The Ways of Judgement’, 2008, p.307), which combines the ‘immediacy’ of Luther’s view of conscience (which included in its focus the individual’s personal encounter with God) with scholasticism’s limitation of conscience to the objects of practical reason. Conscience therefore, in the latter half of the 17thC, comes to be described as God’s ‘deputy’. It’s not much of a jump from this to Kant’s view of conscience as the final arbiter of moral truth in the individual.
[2] For example, James Madison (4th President of the United States) sees conscience as “an imperious sovereign” and “its demands experienced as ‘dictates’”. (W. Cole Durham Jnr, ‘Religious Liberty and the Call of Conscience’, 1992; quoted in Rex Adhar & Ian Leigh, ‘Religious Freedom in the Liberal State’, Oxford, 2013, p.46.)
[3] John Locke, ‘First Letter Concerning Toleration’, quoted in Marian Hillar, “Radical Reformation and the Struggle for Freedom of Conscience” (Outskirts Press, 2019), p.194 (Kindle Edition).
[4] Thomas Jefferson, ‘Notes on the State of Virginia’, quoted in Hillar, “Radical Reformation”, p.196 (Kindle edition). When Jefferson says ‘the rights of conscience… we could not submit’ he is referring to inability to submit conscience to rulers, not refusal. In other words, since external coercion cannot change the conscience, people are not able to submit conscience to rulers, even if they wanted to.
[5] Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Further, liberty of conscience is seen to cover “all ethics and values a human being cherishes…” (United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/ FreedomReligion/faith4rights-toolkit/Pages/Module1.aspx) Australia is a signatory to the ICCPR however its requirements have not been legislated here.
[6] Even further away from the New Testament idea of conscience is Sigmund Freud’s view that conscience is no more than “the interiorization of the norms of parents and society” which therefore has even less to do with objective right or wrong. (Ash, ‘Pure Joy’, p.195-196.)