FREEDOM
119
ble situational decisions and choices, not to the mechanical observance of laws. Freedom of conscience vis-a-vis the disciplinary authority of the Church does not mean that a man tempers his superior's tyranny with his own insubordination. Nor does it mean that he obeys the legitimate commands of authority only when he himself happens to agree with them. Much less does it mean the freedom to do whatever one pleases. Its fundamental meaning is perhaps best expressed by Robert Johann: it is the freedom and duty "to do always and only what I myself think is right." The laws of legitimate authority are normative for the Christian, but they are not always applicable. To judge their binding force and relevance in one's own situation is the burden and freedom of conscience. DocTRINAL AUTHORITY oF THE CHURCH
The question of freedom of conscience before the doctrinal authority of the Church is more delicate and complicated. Sometimes the Church exercises her teaching authority by making authentic fallible pronouncements, and sometimes she makes infallible definitions of faith. This fact splits our question into two: l) What freedom does the individual Catholic conscience have in relation to the authentic non-infallible magisternm? and 2) what freedom does it have in the face of dogmas of faith? ¡ The problem for freedom of conscience before the authentic non-infallible magisterium is posed sharply by these words from Vatican II's Constitution on the Church: "In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent of soul. This religious submission of will and of mind must be shown in a special way to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cmhedra. That is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will" (25).