“...And, if he have pursued his inclination, forthwith he is burdened with remorse of conscience for having gone after his passion, which helpeth him not at all the peace he looked for.”
-Thomas A Kempis
It would make sense that if we know that we’re doing something that we shouldn’t be—indulging a guilty pleasure for instance—that we would feel bad after said indulgence. In this quote, Kempis states that one would be “burdened with remorse of conscience,” which would be safe to assume of anyone who has moral fiber. But there’s an issue, it’s not safe to assume anything, and many people do not hold themselves to high moral standards.
Some people have no qualms about indulging in their desires, and they do so without feeling a shred of guilt or shame. I know that when I was younger and indulging in self-gratifying desires, it caused me to become very depressed. My body stiffened and I now have chronic muscle fatigue and my bones feel like they want to split through my skin and break free from my body. I couldn’t stand being the person I was, but I also couldn’t stop indulging. My past addictions have left life-long scars because of the guilt that I feel for allowing myself to be taken by my baser desires, which is why I have a very hard time wrapping my head around the things that people do. I suffered for my sins, so why don’t others seem to?
I got to thinking that there must be some unconscious tradeoff for anyone who defies or denies their sense of morality. For those that are only choosing to pursue short-term gratification, there must be consequences, right? Somewhere down the meandering river that is life, there must be dry spots in which the water does not, or cannot flow. I wonder how people justify the short-term trade-off because I know the pain that the lack of planning, foresight, and awareness caused me. But it really seems that some people just drift along in life blissfully unaware and uncaring of the fact that they live only to serve their senses and impulsive desires. It doesn’t seem fair.
It does not seem fair that some people live however they please with little to no repercussions, but those who choose to live with awareness are susceptible to all kinds of trouble and illnesses. I suppose it is the burden of bearing your own cross. Being aware of yourself and all of your faults and past sins makes it difficult to ignore the necessary transformation that follows awareness. Once you’re aware of something, you cannot become unaware of it. Doing so is simply a denial.
The result is that those who choose to bear the weight of their own conscience have the opportunity to live a life full of meaning and depth, where the love for God supersedes everything as you embrace the obstacles He lays out for you. It’s just difficult to accept the fact that other people refuse to bear their own weight.
Of course everybody suffers; I don’t want to make it seem like I am complaining or that my issues are worse than anyone else’s, they’re definitely not. I just wonder where other people’s burden of remorse and moral conscience are.
The apparent lack of moral conscience seems obvious to me with the way that the world is anymore. People have grown farther away from one another, and even further from God. Loving thy neighbor and doing unto others no longer seems to be the go-to standards in public life. I see needless suffering that can be easily replaced with kindness, and I don’t know why it’s so damn hard for people to be kind. I’m awkward and shy in public, but I do my best to be friendly and thoughtful because that’s how I would like to be treated.
I ought to digress lest this turn into a larger rant. The point that I am trying to make is that it doesn’t seem likely to me that people can get away with just living for short-term, self-gratifying pleasures. There must be a huge sense of cognitive dissonance that grows deeper and deeper the more it is denied and ignored.
I realized that this is an issue seemingly as old as humanity itself. People have always gone against their conscience. It wasn’t until our more recent history (5000 or so years is a short time from a relative point of view) that we really started to wonder about our moral conscience.
Perhaps it is a matter of balance that there are people who listen to their moral conscience and those who do not. I just can’t shake the fear I have of people that are out in the world who have little to no care for others. Even bigger grows my fear due to what seems to be a degradation of general kindness and compassion. I’m almost afraid to go out anymore because of the way that people have been driving. There’s an underlying energy of reckless abandon that I feel every time someone chooses to blind me with their headlights because I’m driving a little slower at night to try and avoid hitting deer.
I’m getting too much off track again. To revisit the point from the quote, someone who chooses to indulge in a fleeting pleasure not only doesn’t get what they’re actually looking for, but is supposedly burdened by a sense of guilt. That sense of guilt, if not felt, is suppressed and subverted at the cost of more than what is apparent in the moment of indulgence. I want to know why people are not only willing to make that sacrifice, but don’t seem to have apparent negative consequences. There must be some threshold in which guilt can no longer be swept under the rug, but I have not experienced or seen this happen in actuality.
The only experience that comes to mind is in Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment, when Raskolnikov can no longer bear the thought of actually getting away with murder. Not only did he successfully murder, but he was even able to avoid being caught even under immense suspicion. He could have gotten away with it, but he also could not keep it to himself. Out of his own sense of moral conscience (or what was remaining of it), he turns himself in and serves his punishment.
Even a child feels guilty when they sneak a cookie before dinner. They know what they did was wrong because they were told that it would not be okay to have a cookie before dinner. I suppose that punishment can make the difference in whether someone decides to do something, but punishment is relegated to cause and effect. If you do x, then y is your punishment. But what’s to stop someone from doing something when they might not be punished for it? The simple answer is to have a strong moral conscience that refuses to do wrong even when it would be easy to get away with it. You might be able to get things by other people, but there’s still yourself to account for, and ultimately, there’s God to account for.
There is yet another reason I perceive that is behind the degeneracy of moral conscience: a lack of faith. People could hold themselves accountable because they had the fear of God in them. They were urged to behave on principle, knowing that it is by living a good and holy life that would allow them to feel God’s love. That sense is all but gone in the modern West. I believe that is why some people wander around aimless, without sense or decency, without hope.
It becomes all the more important to stand up for what is right, and truthfully right, not just by way of feeling. It’s important to develop the discipline that is needed to resist tempting urges and inclinations. Doing so brings us closer to God, who gives us our sense of purpose and direction in life. You may think that you can get away with lying, cheating, or stealing; senseless pleasure for short-term gratification, but the subconscious knows, and, most importantly, God knows. There will be a time when those moments catch up with you, even if it doesn’t seem like it, even if no one else can see or recognize it.