EMCAPP Journal 2

116 Andrew M. Colman’s Dictionary of Psychology (Oxford University Press, 2006) does not feature the term “consci- ence”. This fact is symptomatic of contemporary popular and academic psychology, where the issues of axiology, religion, and morality are marginalized or absent. If the existence and functioning of conscience is addressed at all, it is usually discussed in the context of personality, that is, psychological life, but no mention is made of the relationship between conscience and the spiritual sphere. A notable exception in this regard is V. E. Frankl’s theory, in which conscience, similarly to religiousness, is associ- ated with the spiritual, noetic sphere, rather than in the psychological sphere. There is some disagreement among philosophers, theo- logians, and ethicists as to the understanding of consci- ence, its origin (genesis), structure (constitution), and role (function). For Thomas Aquinas, conscience is an act of reason – an integral part of human existence sanc- tioning one’s responsibility for one’s own doings before oneself and God. I. Kant placed conscience in the domain of practical reason. According to him, man discovers the norms of morality by virtue of his reason. É. Durkheim understands conscience as a product of social life. Theo- logians claim it represents the voice of God. Psychologists analyze conscience as a psychic disposition. In explaining moral acts, psychoanalysis refers to the in- stance of superego, formed by the environment in which a child was reared until the fifth year of its life. Freud practically reduces conscience to the structure of supere- go. C. G. Jung treats it as the voice of the archetype – the core of one’s personality. A. Adler stresses that conscience is a defense mechanism and an instance controlling man in relation to the realm of values. E. Fromm analyzes con- science as the voice of an internalized external authority. G. Allport perceives conscience as a key factor of perso- nality development and makes a distinction between the immature conscience of coercion and the mature con- science of responsibility. These concepts are reductionist and do not take into account the spiritual sphere in which conscience exists and functions. In Christian tradition, conscience is the voice of God in man, and as such it belongs to the spiritual sphere and is a tool that allows one to distinguish what is good and morally sound from what is bad and unsound. This spiri- tual instance influences the sphere of human experiences and is revealed in one’s psychological life in cognitive and evaluating acts. The function of conscience is to identify the value of the object of one’s strivings (cognitive as- pect) and the evaluation of this object (evaluative aspect). Evaluation leads to certain emotional states (a sense of obligation, guilt, remorse, pride, satisfaction). Man dis- cerns the value of an act in the context of the measure God equipped him with (natural law). Obviously, one’s ability to understand values as well as to correctly eva- luate intentions may be partly hindered by one’s current spiritual, psychological, or physical condition. Therefore, it is necessary to constantly verify whether in one’s moral decisions one is guided by the voice of God, or perhaps by that of other people, or by one’s egoism (Acts 4:19). According to Christian psychology, conscience is a place of encounter between man and God, who is concerned with removing the heart of stone (an illformed consci- ence) and giving man a heart of flesh (a sensitive consci- ence): “I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh” (Ez. 36:27). In this context, Christian psychology offers an opportunity to understand the nature and role of conscience in an inte- grative way, as it opposes the reductionist approaches li- miting conscience only to the sphere of psychological life. As an innate disposition, rooted in the spiritual sphere and manifesting itself in the psychological sphere, con- science is shaped in terms of form and content during one’s life. Thus, it is also possible to form an erroneous conscience. In the initial period of life, the responsibility for the formation of conscience rests with the immediate environment of the child; however, adults ought to mo- nitor their conscience themselves to make sure it is not deformed. Disorders of the structure and functions of conscience include immature (infantile) conscience, cap- tive conscience, hypocritical conscience, and scrupulous conscience. Responsibility for acting in accordance with one’s con- science rests with the person, who is obliged to follow his conscience and to make good any damage resulting from actions undertaken in violation of one’s conscience (expiation). A crucial characteristic of conscience is its sensitivity. An adequate level of this characteristic (balan- ced between oversensitivity and insensitivity) is a prere- quisite for the correct discernment of the moral value of actions and the intentions behind them. In summary, one could argue that conscience is a place of meeting between the realm of the spirit and the realm of matter – between the voice of God and the experiences of man shaped by the world in which he lives. Due to this, conscience is one of the central points of psychology based on Christian anthropology. Thus, it is essential that the voice of conscience be treated with due attention and care, especially in the process of psychotherapy. The Central Importance of Conscience for Christian Psychology Romuald Jaworski, Poland, dr. hab., psychologist, psy- chotherapist, supervisor, ca- tholic priest, professor at the Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski University in Warsaw, pre- sident of the Association of Christian Psychologists (ACP) in Poland. He is the author of several books and articles in the field of psy- chology of religion and pas- toral psychology. romualdjaworski@wp.pl Forum

EMCAPP Journal 2

Pages