Lesson video

Hello, my name's Mrs. Robin, and I'm going to be working with you on today's lesson on opposition to an unjust law.

In today's lesson, you will explain how a Christian's personal conviction may lead them to break the law using Dietrich Bonhoeffer as an example.

We'll be using a few keywords today: conscience, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and personal conviction.

Now, conscience is the faculty said to enable us to make moral decisions and to judge our own and others' actions by.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German Lutheran pastor and theologian who opposed the Nazi regime.

And a personal conviction is something a person strongly feels or believes in.

Our lesson today will form two parts.

We'll be looking at personal conviction and the law, and we'll be looking at the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

So let's get started on personal conviction and the law.

The term personal conviction comes from Latin, and it has two parts: from personalis, meaning relating to a person, and from common convincere, meaning to prove or overcome in an argument.

So originally, conviction referred to being proved guilty in court, but over time it also came to mean a strong, firmly held belief, something you are convinced of internally.

So a personal conviction is something a person strongly feels or believes in that guides their actions even when it conflicts with the law or with social expectations.

Although they both involve ideas which can influence actions, there are some important differences between personal convictions and personal opinions.

A personal conviction is a moral or religious stance usually, whereas a personal opinion is probably based on personal preference, what you like.

A personal conviction is very hard to change, whereas a personal opinion is perhaps more likely to change with persuasion, or on reflection, or looking at new evidence.

A personal conviction compels action even at personal cost.

So even when someone is going to lose through continuing, they feel compelled or forced to continue with that action.

In contrast, a personal opinion, although it may influence behaviour, it rarely leads to significant sacrifice.

So rarely do people have to personally give up something for their personal opinion.

Aisha and Andeep are discussing personal opinion and personal conviction.

Aisha says, "I have a friend who says she thinks school uniform is pointless.

She's thinking about starting a petition against it.

Do you think this is an example of acting out of personal conviction?" Andeep says, "Unless she has a strong ethical or cultural reason, like believing uniform suppresses identity or expression, this sounds more like an opinion.

Perhaps she just doesn't like wearing a uniform." Aisha goes on.

"Well, another friend refused to eat meat at a barbecue because she believes it's wrong to kill animals for food.

I think this is more than just a food preference." Andeep says, "I agree.

I think this is a personal conviction.

She believes killing animals is wrong, and she sticks to that even when it's inconvenient, which shows her belief is based on moral concerns." Can you think of any other examples of personal conviction to compare with Aisha's example here that she Andeep have been discussing? Take a moment, turn and talk to someone nearby, if there's someone available, or you can stop and talk to me, and return to the lesson when you are ready to move on.

So let's check your understanding.

Which of the following actions is more likely to be based on a personal conviction? A, refusing to cheat on a test, even when the opportunity presents itself, B, breaking the school rules by wearing trainers, or C, supporting your local football team by going to watch them play? So pause the video if you need to look carefully through the three options and jot down what you think the correct answer is.

Come back when you're ready to move on.

So well done, if you put A, refusing to cheat on a test, even when the opportunity presents itself.

Christian attitudes to personal conviction and the law are informed by different sources of authority, including the Bible, church teachings, the example of other Christians, Christian ethical theories, such as natural law and situation ethics, their conscience, and their ability to reason.

And they may interpret these sources differently or they may emphasise one more than another.

So the Bible is a source of wisdom and authority for Christians on personal conviction and the law.

Romans 13:1 says, "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established." What does the phrase, "let everyone be subject to the governing authorities" suggest about how Christians should respond to the law? Take a moment and turn and talk to somebody nearby if you can, or you can pause and talk to me, and come back when you are ready to move on.

So you may have said that it suggests Christians should respect and follow the law because it reflects God's authority.

Here's a second quotation, Acts 5:29.

"We must obey God rather than human beings." So slightly different from the first one.

What does this suggest about the relationship between God's laws and the laws of human beings? Well, hopefully you've been able to turn and talk to someone nearby, and you may have said it suggests that when human laws contradict God's moral commands, Christians should follow God's will.

The term conscience comes from Latin, and it's got two parts, con and science.

Now, the word con in Latin means with, and science actually come from scientia, meaning knowledge.

So originally, conscience refers to knowledge within oneself.

That's why the word con is in there, with oneself.

Over time, this came to mean an inner moral guide.

A person's conscience is a deeply held moral or religious belief.

It guides their actions, and it does so even when it conflicts with the law or with social expectations.

So for many Christians, conscience is an important source of authority.

Danielle says, "As a Roman Catholic, I believe my conscience is where I hear God's voice guiding me.

The Catechism calls it the 'secret core and sanctuary' where we are alone with God.

My conscience is formed through prayer, reason, and church teachings, it shapes my personal convictions, and leads me to take a stand.

For example, I volunteer for Pax Christi, a Catholic peace organisation, because of my conviction that it is wrong for countries to have nuclear weapons." So how is Danielle's work with Pax Christi informed by her conscience? Take a moment, pause if you need to, have a read through what Danielle said, turn and talk to somebody nearby if you can, or you can talk to me, and then come back when you're ready to move on.

Fiona says, "As an Anglican, I believe conscience is a gift from God that helps me discern right from wrong.

Reflecting on what my conscience tells me informs my personal convictions.

One of my personal convictions is that exploiting of the people is wrong.

This is why I refuse to buy clothes from companies that use child labour or unfair working conditions, even though it costs more to shop ethically." So what is the connection between personal conviction and conscience for Fiona? Pause the video.

Turn and talk to someone nearby if you can.

You can also reread what Fiona said, and then come back when you're ready to move on.

Tamara says, "George Fox, the founder of Quakerism, taught that 'There is that of God in everyone.

' As a Quaker, I believe my conscience can be found when I reflect silently and listen to the inner light of God in me.

Quakers have a long tradition of following personal conviction.

They have refused military service, campaigned for prison reform, and promoted ethical business.

I try to take a stand where I can, and have recently signed up to visit people in prison." So why might Tamara's conscience have led her to want to visit people in prison? Pause the video, have a reread of what Tamara said, and have a discussion with someone nearby if you can, or you can talk to me, and then come back when you're ready to move on.

<v ->Diane says, "As a humanist,</v> I believe conscience is shaped by carefully reasoning about right and wrong.

It is not given by a God.

My personal convictions are based on evidence and a belief in human dignity.

Following my conscience means acting responsibly towards others.

One way in which I do this is by supporting Amnesty International because of my personal conviction that we should protect people from torture, discrimination, and injustice." And Diane is a humanist so she doesn't believe in God.

I'd like to have a think about her view on where conscience comes from and how it's different from the Christian ideas that we've considered.

So pause the video, turn and talk to someone nearby, if you can, reread what Diane said, and the return when you're ready to move on.

Christians have to balance following the law with following their personal convictions.

So on the one hand, we have that verse from Romans 13:1 that suggests you should follow the law.

"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established." But then on the other hand, we have that verse from Acts 5:29.

Following personal conviction, "We must obey God rather than human beings." So for Christians, this means that there may be times when personal conviction could override the need to follow a law if that law is considered to be unjust or unfair.

Now, Martin Luther King famously did this.

He engaged in civil disobedience, which meant he broke laws as a protest against those unjust laws.

So for him, the law, city ordinances in Birmingham, Alabama, which banned protests and marches without a permit, was overridden by his personal conviction.

And he led peaceful marches against segregation in public places along with hundreds of others.

He was arrested for marching without a permit.

Let's check your understanding.

Which of the following is an example of personal conviction overriding the need to follow the law? Is it A, choosing to buy ethically sourced products? Is it B, paying a parking fine on time? Is it C, refusing to be conscripted into the army due to religious beliefs? Or D, wearing a seatbelt while driving? So take a moment, read through those options again, pause if you need to, and then come back when you are ready to check your answer.

So well done, if you chose C, refusing to be conscripted into the army due to religious beliefs.

Conscription, of course, meant that people had to join the army.

And if you refuse to do that, you become what's known as a conscientious objector.

You are refusing on the grounds of your conscience.

For task A, on personal conviction and the law, part one.

I'd like you to explain how Catholic Christians approach issues surrounding personal conviction and the law by developing each of the points on the mind map.

What guides personal conviction? What source of authority supports this? And what might this lead Catholics to do? So take your time.

Think about what we've learned today about Catholic views on personal conviction, and using it to oppose the law.

Pause the video.

Come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

So let's have a look at what you could have said.

What guides personal conviction? Well, for Catholic Christians, it's an informed conscience, which is a gift from God.

What source of authority supports this? The Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1778, teaches that "Conscience is man's most secret core and his sanctuary." And what might this result in? Well, it may lead Catholics to oppose laws that go against God's law, such as those allowing nuclear weapons.

So well done, if you managed to explain how Catholics see personal conviction and the law.

For part two of our task, we're going to be looking at explaining how Quaker Christians approaches issues surrounding personal conviction and the law.

And, again, you're going to be developing points on the mind map.

So thinking about what guides personal conviction for Quaker Christians, what source of authority supports this, and what this might lead Quakers to do? So take your time.

Think about what we've learned today about Quaker views on personal conviction and the law.

Write down your answer, and come back when you are ready to see what you could have written.

So well done If you have said that for Quakers, the inner light, which is God within every person, is what guides their personal conviction.

If you've used as your source of authority, George Fox, the founder of Quakerism who taught that "There is that of God in everyone," and if you said it might lead Quakers to take strong moral stances, such as refusing military service, and protesting nuclear weapons.

Let's move on to the second part of our lesson where we're going to look at Dietrich Bonhoeffer Sometimes personal conviction leads people to engage in civil disobedience and even break the law.

Here are some examples.

Mahatma Gandhi in 1869 to 1948, led nonviolent protests against British rule in India.

And this was strictly speaking illegal, and so, civil disobedience.

Asma Jahangir, 1952 to 2018, defended women and minority rights in Pakistan, challenging unjust laws in court.

Hannah Senesh, 1921 to 1944, parachuted into Nazi occupied Europe in 1944 to help rescue Jews, and she was executed for this.

Greta Thunberg, born in 2003, has broken protest laws to raise awareness about climate change.

And, of course, in the previous part of the lesson, we mentioned the example of Martin Luther King.

Here's a photograph of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Now, he was a German Lutheran pastor and theologian who opposed the Nazi regime because of his personal conviction.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer could not ignore the injustice he saw under Nazi rule.

As Hitler's regime grew more brutal, Bonhoeffer's personal conviction, which was shaped by his deep Christian faith, led him to believe that standing against evil was more important than obeying a corrupt legal system.

He believed that Christians were not only called to pray and worship, but to resist injustice and defend the oppressed, even if it meant breaking the law or facing personal harm.

So acting on this belief, Bonhoeffer participated in efforts to assist Jews in escaping Nazi persecution, and he later became involved in a failed plot to assassinate Hitler.

Now, these were not easy decisions, but he strongly believed that obedience to God required him to act.

In 1943, Bonhoeffer was arrested for his involvement in the resistance.

He spent two years in prison, and was executed in 1945, just weeks before the end of the war.

Bonhoeffer's sacrifice, including his arrest and execution, has become a powerful symbol of Christian faith in action.

His legacy lives on as a Christian martyr for justice, someone who stood firm in his beliefs and acted courageously in the face of evil.

So let's check your understanding.

What is the missing word? Bonhoeffer's personal conviction led him to join a plot to.

Hitler.

So take a moment, pause the video if you need to, and then you can come back to check your answer.

So well done, if you put in the word assassinate.

So he felt so strongly that what Hitler was doing was wrong, that actually, morally, the best thing to do was to join that plot to assassinate Hitler in order to prevent the immense suffering caused by the Nazi regime.

Bonhoeffer's actions centred around his beliefs about grace.

Grace is the unconditional and generous love that God shows to people who do not deserve it.

Bonhoeffer's particular take on this was he believed grace should be costly.

Grace for him translates into action.

So his belief in grace shaped his personal convictions and his conscience, and it was this that led him to acts of civil disobedience against the Nazi regime.

So the idea of costly grace is an important part of Bonhoeffer's theology.

Cheap grace is when people accept God's forgiveness, but don't change how they live.

It means grace without effort, and is not truly following Jesus.

Now, Bonhoeffer believed this kind of faith was empty and dishonest.

In contrast, costly grace is when people accept God's forgiveness and change how they live.

It means truly following Jesus by standing up for what is right.

Bonhoeffer called it costly because it costs a person their comfort or even their life.

Let's check your understanding again.

True or false? Bonhoeffer believed that because of God's grace, Christian should avoid conflict.

So take a moment to think about whether it's true or false, but also to think about why you have come to that conclusion.

Pause the video if you need to, and then come back when you're ready to check your answer.

So well done, if you put false.

Well, why is it false? Because Bonhoeffer believed in costly grace, which means following Jesus by standing up for what is right even when it involves personal sacrifice.

For Task B-1 on Dietrich Bonhoeffer, I'd like you to complete the table below to set out the positives and negatives of breaking the law, if your personal conviction tells you it isn't just, using Dietrich Bonhoeffer as an example.

Some key words to include would be change, conscience, consequences, and justice.

To take the time, pause the video and think carefully about Bonhoeffer's story before you come up with some positives and negatives.

So you could have said for the positives, breaking an unjust law can lead to a positive social or moral change.

Bonhoeffer's stand against Nazism and the church's silence has inspired others to resist injustice.

Another positive.

Breaking an unjust law because of your personal conviction shows moral integrity and staying true to your beliefs.

Bonhoeffer followed his Christian conscience, even when it meant opposing the state and facing death.

On the negatives we have, break the law may result in punishment, loss of freedom, or harm to self and others.

Bonhoeffer was imprisoned for two years and executed just weeks before the war ended.

Conscience and personal conviction can be personal and not always aligned with what is right.

Some argue that Bonhoeffer's involvement in a plot to kill Hitler challenges the Christian teaching of non-violence.

Now, you might have very different ideas from me, but well done if you've got things along the lines of how breaking an unjust law could lead to positive change, but, of course, it has personal consequences too.

Part two of our task on Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

I'd like you to choose the strongest point to agree or disagree that you should break the law, if your personal conviction tells you the law is unjust, and explain why it is a strong argument.

So you can use the positives and negatives that you had earlier as arguments to agree and disagree.

Suggested sentence starters are, "A strong argument, which agrees or disagrees is," and then you can choose from, "This is a strong argument as," "This argument is compelling because," "The argument is powerful as it," This argument is convincing because," and finally, you can finish with, "This is supported by.

." So take your time.

Think about the arguments that you came up with when you thought about your positives and negatives.

Pause the video and come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

Let's have a look at what you could have said.

A strong argument which agrees is that breaking an unjust law because of personal conviction shows moral integrity and staying true to your beliefs.

The argument is powerful as it reminds us that without people who are willing to take a stand, injustice can continue unchallenged.

This is supported by the example of Dietrich Bonhoeffer whose resistance to the Nazi regime demonstrated the importance of standing up for what is right, even when it is dangerous.

So well done, if you managed to explain why the argument is powerful or strong, but you also linked it to the example of Bonhoeffer.

In today's lesson, we have looked at the fact that personal conviction is a strongly held belief that motivates a person to act according to their values, even when it goes against the law.

That while Christians are generally taught to follow the law, as in Romans 13:1, personal conviction may take priority when laws conflict with God's commands, as Acts 5:29 suggests.

Conscience plays a key role in personal conviction and different Christian denominations highlight its importance in making moral decisions.

And finally, Bonhoeffer's resistance to the Nazis demonstrates how Christian faith can lead to defying immoral laws, even at personal cost.

So well done for working so hard with me in today's lesson.