The Fall and Redemption of Conscience: A Reformed Biblical Theology with Rev. Andrea Ferrari

In this episode of Chasing Leviathan, host PJ Wehry sits down with Rev. Andrea Ferrari—Reformed pastor, theologian, and author of The Fall and Redemption of Conscience: A Reformed Biblical Theology—to explore one of the most neglected yet foundational topics in Christian thought: the nature of the human conscience. From John Calvin’s sensus divinitatis to Thomas Aquinas’ intellectual approach to moral reasoning, Rev. Ferrari uncovers how Scripture, church history, and theological tradition shape our understanding of what it means to be human before God.

Together, PJ and Rev. Ferrari discuss how conscience functions not merely as a moral calculator but as a spiritual sense, an innate awareness of the presence, judgment, and goodness of God. The conversation ranges from the spiritual senses tradition of the early church and medieval theologians like Bonaventure, to modern debates about whether conscience existed before the Fall, engaging voices like Herman Bavinck, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and John Webster. Along the way, they explore the implications of conscience for everyday moral experience, the universality of moral awareness in Romans 2, and the relationship between law, grace, and the human person in Reformed theology.

If you're interested in biblical theology, Christian anthropology, Reformed doctrine, spiritual perception, Calvin vs. Aquinas, or the intersection of philosophy, psychology, and theology, this deep and accessible conversation sheds new light on the heart of what it means to perceive God and respond to Him. A rich and thoughtful dialogue for pastors, scholars, students, and anyone curious about how conscience shapes the Christian life.

Make sure to check out Rev. Ferrari's book: The Fall and Redemption of Conscience: A Reformed Biblical Theology 👉 https://www.amazon.com/dp/1683598725

Check out our blog on www.candidgoatproductions.com 

Who thinks that they can subdue Leviathan? Strength resides in its neck; dismay goes before it. When it rises up, the mighty are terrified. Nothing on earth is its equal. It is without fear. It looks down on all who are haughty; it is king over all who are proud. 

These words inspired PJ Wehry to create Chasing Leviathan. Chasing Leviathan was born out of two ideals: that truth is worth pursuing but will never be subjugated, and the discipline of listening is one of the most important habits anyone can develop. 

What is Chasing Leviathan?

Who thinks that they can subdue Leviathan? Strength resides in its neck; dismay goes before it. It is without fear. It looks down on all who are haughty; it is king over all who are proud. These words inspired PJ Wehry to create Chasing Leviathan. Chasing Leviathan was born out of two ideals: that truth is worth pursuing but will never be subjugated, and the discipline of listening is one of the most important habits anyone can develop. Every episode is a dialogue, a journey into the depths of a meaningful question explored through the lens of personal experience or professional expertise.

Hello, and welcome to Chasing Leviathan.

I'm your host, P.J. Weary, and I'm here today with Reverend Andrea Farradi, pastor at the Reformed Church in Perugia, Italy, and a minister with the United Reformed Churches of North America. And we're here today to talk about his book, The Fall and Redemption of Conscience, a Reformed Biblical Theology. And it's not out yet, so I don't have a copy, but I think Dr. or Reverend Farradi, you do.

I'd love to see the cover. Everything I've seen has been online. Love that.

Reverend Farradi, why this book? Well, first of all, it is good to be with you, P.J. Thank you for the opportunity to speak about my work on conscience. Why this book? Well, basically, because I love to study the Bible. That's the chief reason.

But secondly, having been a minister of Word and Sacraments for 30 years, I realized some time ago the need to continue to improve my understanding of theology and of preaching and teaching the truth. And therefore, the need to understand more what is a human person. So that's, in general, the reason why I decided to start this work.

The more specific reason was that I came across around 15 years ago, around 2010, to an article written by John Webster entitled God and Conscience. And from that point on, I never ceased to read John Webster. And that's why I decided to pursue more theological studies concentrating on the doctrine of conscience.

P.J. I was especially excited about this interview because a particular interest of mine is what is a human person. And I think this is a lost study, both in theology, but also in philosophy and psychology, this faculty, or this sense. We'll get into that.

But this is something that we develop, the conscience and how important a role it plays in us as human beings. So I think that's a good lead-in. What is the conscience and what are some common misconceptions that you're trying to correct in this book? Well, that's a very difficult question because it is very, very general.

So in speaking of conscience and what it is, usually our first thought is to explain or understand conscience as a moral capacity, a capacity for forming moral judgments. And that, of course, is true. But trying to explain what conscience is and how it works, it is soon clear that in spite of this general agreement, consensus on moral conscience, there is a lot of disagreement among scholars about a number of issues related to the nature and function of conscience.

So in my work, I basically try to show that we need to understand conscience not as a moral capacity only, but as a capacity for recognizing or acknowledging or perceiving the presence of another. And in particular, what I try to do is to show that conscience is a perceptual awareness of the presence of God, what John Calvin used to call sensus divinitatis, the divine sense, the awareness of living and having our being in the presence of God. And then because of this sense of living in the presence of God, there is in us a derivative awareness which is the awareness of the moral demands on us by the God we are aware of because this capacity which we call conscience.

And forgive me, I'm going to butcher this pronunciation. So I'll ask you, there's the sensus divinitatis and what's the other, that derivative sense, the sensus? John Calvin calls it the sensus divini iudici, the sense of divine judgment, which is the moral judgment of conscience. But according to Calvin, and I have a quite a large section on this in my book, according to Calvin, this sensus of divine judgment derives from the primary sensus, which is the sensus divinitatis proper, the sense of God.

Would one way to think about this, and I've been meditating on this a little bit because we've gotten to talk earlier, would one way to think about this be kind of parallel with our sense of taste, that we taste goodness? And so there's a general taste for food, but then when we are aware of really, really good food, we realize that places demands on our skills for cooking and for appreciation. Would that be a way to talk about the derivative sense? Well, that would be a way to describe the sense in itself. In fact, I try to explain the difference between Calvin and, for example, Aquinas and in their respective understanding of how conscience works.

For Aquinas, conscience is a judgment of practical reason. Therefore, it is an intellectual act. For Calvin, conscience is not an acting of our practical reason.

It is a kind of, as I said, awareness. It is a non-physical perception. It is an intuitive kind of knowledge, or we can even call it innate knowledge.

Innate? Innate. Yes, yes. That inner, yes.

So, yes, yes. And in this regard, I make some observations trying to relate this understanding of conscience as non-physical perception to the so-called spiritual sense tradition in the ancient church and in the medieval church, trying to explain the way in which conscience works using the conceptuality of this tradition about the spiritual senses. What are some other spiritual senses, if you don't mind my asking? Well, that's another subject.

It's okay. But there is a long story starting with origin about the divine sense and even if in my work I try to show that this tradition, this theological trajectory is found in the Bible itself, because it is the Bible, both in the Old and in the New Testament, that speaks about spiritual knowledge in terms of the physical sense. And there is, in a number of occasions in the Bible, a comparison between our physical senses and our spiritual knowledge.

So, yes, there is, of course, every theologian had a different doctrine of the spiritual senses. In general, we may say that this tradition came to full maturity with Saint Bonaventura, Bonaventura da Bagnoregio, a Franciscan theologian, who developed a very nuanced and deep description of the spiritual senses. And there are, if I remember correctly, of course, in his doctrine of the spiritual senses, the most important are those related to, not to the intellect, but to the affection.

So, taste and touch, while the other three, no, yes, taste and touch, while the other three, sight, hearing and sight, hearing. Smelling? Is smell one of them? Yes, they belong to the intellect. Hmm.

So, that's in general, again, if I remember correctly, you know, Bonaventura's understanding of this doctrine. And what is important for our discussion here is that you have this distinction between intellectual knowledge and affective knowledge. Yes, yes.

In my work on conscience, I explain how conscience works in terms of affections rather than in terms of the intellect. Because you're choosing to follow Calvin instead of Aquinas, what are the problems with choosing to follow more of an intellectual path with Aquinas? What problems do you run into if you choose to have a more intellectual approach to the conscience, a judgment of practical reason? Well, I would say that only only intellectually trained people would be able to use the so-called syllogism to reason their morality. While many people who are not intellectually or even philosophically trained, if we understand conscience as an act of practical reason, would be not able to reach the proper moral conclusions.

So, this is a defense of the ordinary person's conscience in some ways. That's one way to look at the problem and to answer your question. But another point I would make is that to strengthen what I've just said, is that, you know, in Romans 2, Paul claims that conscience is present in every human being, not only those who have been trained in philosophy or in moral philosophy, or just those who are able to reason using the syllogistic approach.

So, explaining conscience as sensus allows to affirm that conscience is the universal experience of human beings. And, of course, for us, Protestants, this allows us to stress the law gospel distinction, because we, you know, conscience is identified with the law. And therefore, conscience has a role subordinate to the law.

And in this way, conscience is a kind of door for us through which we may introduce the gospel and that is free justification by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Instead of the demands of the law that are natural for us, because we have a conscience, and even an ignorant person, a person who does not have any kind of formal education, understands God's law. Which, I mean, it sounds like you're splitting hairs, like you're going for very fine distinctions, intellectual versus affective perceptions or practical judgments.

But when you flesh out the application, that's very practical. Is conscience, are moral judgments something that you have to be educated to have, or is that something that everyone, and when you put it like that, it seems like everyone is capable of moral judgments. Yes, even people who, you know, don't belong to a nation, a people, not Christian.

Now, so, and this is interesting. You talk about how Bavink thinks that human beings did not have conscience before the fall, and you, and I'm quoting here, you humbly disagree. Why, so, if we understand it in terms of this sense, why do you think that human beings had a conscience before the fall? Well, the reason is very simple, because there is nothing in the universe, according to the Christian confession, that does not come by creation of God.

So, when Bavink claims that before the fall, and these are Bavink's words, before the fall, strictly speaking, there was no conscience in humans, that is imprecise, because we cannot claim that conscience was not essential to human nature before the fall. So, of course, I think that Bavink is speaking, considering the way in which we experience conscience after the fall. So, it is understandable what he is saying, but I think he speaks, you know, without having considered with the sufficient attention what is implied in his words.

And the same, another theologian who makes a similar statement is Bonhoeffer in his book, Creation and Fall. I think that from what I understand, the problem is that we have very little biblical material before the fall, describing human, the human person. So, that's the difficulty.

But I think at the same time that we cannot, we cannot say that you cannot explain or experience conscience apart from sin. That's a mistake. In fact, I try to prove biblically that we find in the Bible enough material to speak about created conscience.

And so, where do you find that in the Bible? Oh, well, well, I respond by quoting two passages. Of course, I work with Genesis 1, 2, and 3. Especially what I try to do is to consider God's own moral judgment on creation, which according to God's judgment, God's moral judgment was very good. So, one thing I try to do is that when man was created, when man, Adam and Eve, humanity, partook of the Sabbath entering into God's rest, they partook also and rejoiced in God's own moral judgment about the whole work of creation.

That is something I do. And I would like also to mention another important passage in the Bible, which is Psalm 92, which is, according to the superscription in the original Old Testament, it's a song for the Sabbath, Psalm 92. So, what I do with Psalm 92 is to read it backward.

If Psalm 92, which of course can be read through a scatological lens, but if Psalm 92 is a song for the Sabbath, for fallen humanity, because Psalm 92 is holy scripture, which came to us because we are fallen creatures, okay? So, what I say, what I try to prove is that if that Psalm and the things we read in Psalm 92 are true for fallen humanity, they must have been true also and especially for unfallen humanity. And if you look for the judgments, the moral judgments of conscience in Psalm 92, you find them. And that, compared with Genesis 1 and 2, shows that humanity, of course, has a moral sense, a conscience after the fall, but if humanity has a conscience, this covenantal awareness before the covenant Lord, in the fallen state, that is also true when we speak of humanity in the condition of innocence before sin entered the world.

So, I hope that is clear enough. Yes, yes, and that's why you make this point early on that you want

(This file is longer than 30 minutes. Go Unlimited at TurboScribe.ai to transcribe files up to 10 hours long.)