Conscience and debates surrounding its prerogatives are an ongoing source of conflict in our society.  The conflict centers on contradictory and mutually exclusive understandings of human moral agency, making conversations around conscience and conscientious objection difficult. 

 

One group equates the conscience simply as the right of an autonomous individual to exercise any moral choice, as long as others are not harmed. Moral “truth” is subjective, defined by each individual will, and limited or constrained selectively only by social “consensus”. Majority opinion defines what is morally acceptable. From this perspective, persons who have moral qualms about cooperating in action they understand to be wrong may be coerced to comply or removed from the exercise of their profession.

 

Another group understands conscience as a transcendent human capacity for moral discernment. It is the "voice of God" within the human heart. Attentiveness to the interior voice of the Creator helps human beings to pass judgement on a particular moral question, but not to define what is “right” or “wrong” per se.  From this perspective, moral “truth” is objective, not defined by an individual will, but located over and above it, and so moral truths are discernible by means of rational deliberation and training in virtues: we can discern “good” and “evil” through the careful examination of experiences or choices that lead either to human flourishing or to destruction.

​

So how are we to live out the experience of human moral agency?  What are health care professionals to do when confronted with conflicts of conscience? Join us and Professor Xavier Symons for a thoughtful consideration of these important questions...  Registration is required!