text: You are the one who is lost here.  No President or congress has [or will] change that law.    Secondly, I was not referring to Charles Curran----Brian Johnstone wrote that essay.
  
  Johnstone demonstrated that during the pontificates of JP II and Benedict---a profound shift moved from Gaudiem et spes which saw the consciences of Christians as often ignorant, but it was an inculpable ignorance.  Ratzinger saw Christians as often ignorant, but culpably so.
  
  Johnstone, "Conscience in Error," in CONSCIENCE: READINGS IN MORAL THEOLOGY 14, ed. Charles Curran [Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2004], p. 169.
  
  Ratzinger's critique of conscience fails to distinguish between the primary and secondary precepts of moral law.  It fails to recognize or entertain the complexity of markedly different cultural contexts.  Ratzinger, who had a limited pastoral experience as young priest---assumed far too quickly that people are guilty for not knowing the moral law, when in fact, they may be inculpably unaware.