Piotr Mazurkiewicz

This article addresses the issue of the relationship between God’s law and secular law, and presents a thesis for the legitimacy of the right to the objection of conscience “in which the voice of God speaks.” Considerations relate to conscience as the power of knowing good and duties, the universality of this knowledge, its legitimacy and conditions for its reliability. By referring to stoicism and neo-Platonism, but especially to the elements of St. Paul’s theology and the views of Benedict XVI, the author shows how important it is to introduce the category of nature and conscience to a secular, rationalist reflection on law. He presents the position of Christian theologians who spoke out against religious law and his own arguments, as well as the view expressed, among others, by Benedict XVI about the corrective role of religion with respect to human reason, as well as the importance of human reason for religion. The author also highlights the significant lack of reflection on natural law in modern science and the dramatic consequences thereof, such as the denial of the right to conscientious objection.

The question arises whether the coherence between Democracy and the Christian vision of the person and Society as something much more essential or is it simply a matter of chance? It is only with Christianity, with its teachings on the concept of inviolable rights of the person, equality, political rights of the people, and the absolute value of relationships based on law and justice as the basis of society and based on fraternal love, created a new Vision of political order which all contemporary nations aim to implement. If not for the Christian concept of democracy, the democracy that we know today, would probably have taken a different form. The Church’s support for democracy is something unquestionable. However, not every kind of democracy automatically is in keeping with the teachings of the Church. This depends on a democracy’s relation to truth and freedom. The Church supports democracy today, however it does not support one, concrete vision of the political system of the State. It respects the just autonomy of the democratic order, and it does not have a concrete reason for supporting one particular institutional and constitutional solution or another.