What is a "Cafeteria Catholic"?

[geocajun]

I left off yesterday before this turned into a dating thread...


It seems that Geo and Davidnic have advised that to be in full knowledge of the Church's teaching on contraceptives and still use contraceptives is NOT an offense that makes one an Heretic.

However there I still have a question regarding Grace. For this person that is in full knowledge and using contraceptives are they then in mortal sin until they stop using contraceptives?

I believe using contraceptives would constitute serious matter, and therefore if done with full knowledge of that, and with free choice it would be a mortal sin.
That said, there are all sorts of circumstances which can contribute to diminishing ones culpability for sin.

In my own case, I honestly don't feel that I have a free choice here. I feel as though I'm in the situation where someone says "do this or die" - IOW, I do not have a reasonable alternative, and having a reasonable alternative is a requirement for making a moral choice.
Others can argue what they want about me and my situation, but they aren't me, and they aren't in my situation, so I don't care what they think

Bear in mind that I've given NFP a chance - so much chance that I have had 4 children unplanned, while using natural family planning. I can't risk it anymore. I've given what I'm prepared to give to attempting to use NFP, which is the only moral alternative to contraception for the spacing of children which is offered to us.

Each of us is accountable to God for what we do, and for what we fail to do. I think I'm not in a state of mortal sin, and I don't think I will be in a state of mortal sin if I choose to use contraception. I do not say this without having given this much thought and much consideration.

Knowing what I know of catholic teaching does make me that much more culpable for doing wrong, but I still feel comfortable with what I am doing and going to do. I could end up in hell, but if I don't do what I must, then I will certainly create hell for my family so either way I'm a loser is how I see it.
I think I'll just end up living with some guilt for the rest of my life (thank you Jesus).

 

[geocajun]

I actually considered the same thing years ago, and have tried to write from time to time. Nothing ever gets near finished. And those I share it with generally don't seem to think it's any good. I don't know what to tell you other than that I put a lot of effort into it and always seem to stall, and the partially completely product isn't a quality one. It could have something to do with my neurological issues, I'm not sure. The folks who evaluated me don't seem to feel writing is an option, or they would have recommended it, so that's probably a good guess. Either that or I'm just someone who can write a paragraph or two of his own views but not a novel about fictional characters -- I'm sure a lot of folks fit into that category, otherwise we'd all be authors!

I'm going to guess you didn't create a detailed outline before starting, so half way through you ran out of ideas, right? Try creating a detailed outline and start again. I bet you'd do great. I'd be willing to take a look if you're interested.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I believe using contraceptives would constitute serious matter, and therefore if done with full knowledge of that, and with free choice it would be a mortal sin.
That said, there are all sorts of circumstances which can contribute to diminishing ones culpability for sin.

In my own case, I honestly don't feel that I have a free choice here. I feel as though I'm in the situation where someone says "do this or die" - IOW, I do not have a reasonable alternative, and having a reasonable alternative is a requirement for making a moral choice.
Others can argue what they want about me and my situation, but they aren't me, and they aren't in my situation, so I don't care what they think

Bear in mind that I've given NFP a chance - so much chance that I have had 4 children unplanned, while using natural family planning. I can't risk it anymore. I've given what I'm prepared to give to attempting to use NFP, which is the only moral alternative to contraception for the spacing of children which is offered to us.

Each of us is accountable to God for what we do, and for what we fail to do. I think I'm not in a state of mortal sin, and I don't think I will be in a state of mortal sin if I choose to use contraception. I do not say this without having given this much thought and much consideration.

Knowing what I know of catholic teaching does make me that much more culpable for doing wrong, but I still feel comfortable with what I am doing and going to do. I could end up in hell, but if I don't do what I must, then I will certainly create hell for my family so either way I'm a loser is how I see it.
I think I'll just end up living with some guilt for the rest of my life (thank you Jesus).

I do not know your reasons for your decision and you do not need to tell us. But I was asking myself if society or our government could cause social situations through economic and other means to change in such a way that people are unable to live morally by God's laws?

My answer is "yes". Our Catechism speaks on just this in 2426 to 2436. Specifically 2426 speaks in a short but sweet way to me. It says what all the catechism says and that is to put God first and the rest second.

QUOTE:
2426 The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community. Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with social justice so as to correspond to God's plan for man.209


AND then reading about family and society is says:

2211 The political community has a duty to honor the family, to assist it, and to ensure especially:

• the freedom to establish a family, have children, and bring them up in keeping with the family's own moral and religious convictions;
• the protection of the stability of the marriage bond and the institution of the family;
• the freedom to profess one's faith, to hand it on, and raise one's children in it, with the necessary means and institutions;
• the right to private property, to free enterprise, to obtain work and housing, and the right to emigrate;
• in keeping with the country's institutions, the right to medical care, assistance for the aged, and family benefits;
• the protection of security and health, especially with respect to dangers like drugs, pornography, alcoholism, etc.;
• the freedom to form associations with other families and so to have representation before civil authority.15

So I ask you (all) does our society create the moral and ethical environment for us to live good Chrisitan lives? Or are we expecting too much and in so doing telling ourselves it is alright to sin? Or maybe it is a combination of both?

I think these are good questions. In the world today both the man and woman are called to work and with many to send our children to strangers if need be to raise them while we are at work. We even leave our parents to fend for themselves when they are too old or unable to work any longer.

 

[geocajun]

Jack, I agree they are important questions. This really gets into the sorts of things couples must consider when making prudential judgments, and the sorts of things pastors must consider when giving pastoral guidance.
These aren't the sorts of things it is good to make general statements about. Invariably they result in sweeping statements such as "it doesn't matter how hard people have it. Suck it up and give your life to God completely. No excuses losers."

Also, the following might help clarify a bit about the affect circumstances, which are secondary to determine the moral quality of an act, play on the culpability one has for the act:

Note that circumstances can increase or decrease the good or badness of the of the act, and the culpability for the act.

1754 The circumstances, including the consequences, are secondary elements of a moral act. They contribute to increasing or diminishing the moral goodness or evil of human acts (for example, the amount of a theft). They can also diminish or increase the agent's responsibility (such as acting out of a fear of death). Circumstances of themselves cannot change the moral quality of acts themselves; they can make neither good nor right an action that is in itself evil.

1756 It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Geo it is clear to me that following God's laws can be difficult at times and maybe for some they seem impossible. These people have struggles they need to deal with and should have a good spiritual advisor. And it is best that they do not shop around for someone that agrees with everything they say. Even a priest can be an idiot and lead us away from God's path. So we must find a spiritual advisor that knows God's laws well and is compassionate but not for our earthly life but spiritual life. That will help us make the best decisions.

And if we are in dire financial straights and cannot have many children then we should try abstinance in my opinion. But if that is not always possible then we need that spiritual advisor.

BUT we should never allow a situation like this to encourage those that can have children to use contraceptives. Then we are encouraging those people to be selfish and to sin and this will only degrade our society even further. Not to mention we could be leading them to damnation by not giving them the correct advise that they need to hear.

Does that make sense or are my thoughts coming through as ramblings?

 

[geocajun]

Geo it is clear to me that following God's laws can be difficult at times and maybe for some they seem impossible. These people have struggles they need to deal with and should have a good spiritual advisor. And it is best that they do not shop around for someone that agrees with everything they say. Even a priest can be an idiot and lead us away from God's path. So we must find a spiritual advisor that knows God's laws well and is compassionate but not for our earthly life but spiritual life. That will help us make the best decisions.

And if we are in dire financial straights and cannot have many children then we should try abstinance in my opinion. But if that is not always possible then we need that spiritual advisor.

BUT we should never allow a situation like this to encourage those that can have children to use contraceptives. Then we are encouraging those people to be selfish and to sin and this will only degrade our society even further. Not to mention we could be leading them to damnation by not giving them the correct advise that they need to hear.

Does that make sense or are my thoughts coming through as ramblings?

Jack, I agree with that. We shouldn't counsel folks to use contraceptives, but we shouldn't condemn them either. I'd think that my own opinion on that would be obvious since I am always careful to do my best to convey what is accurate catholic teaching, and distinguish that from my own situation and what I'm doing.
At the end of the day, the best we can do for folks is inform them, and pray for them. We can't force God's will on them - not even God does that.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Jack, I agree with that. We shouldn't counsel folks to use contraceptives, but we shouldn't condemn them either. I'd think that my own opinion on that would be obvious since I am always careful to do my best to convey what is accurate catholic teaching, and distinguish that from my own situation and what I'm doing.
At the end of the day, the best we can do for folks is inform them, and pray for them. We can't force God's will on them - not even God does that.

Amen brother! And Alleluia!!!

Keep praying for me and I will keep praying for you.

I think it was Father Corapi who said that if we make the intention to have all our prayers include someone and something that even if we forget to say it God already knows we intended it. I am doing this for you.

 

[geocajun]

Thanks Jack

 

[Fish and Bread]

I'm going to guess you didn't create a detailed outline before starting, so half way through you ran out of ideas, right?

I had a general plot structure, at least. I just tend to run out of momentum, and the quality was kind of poor in terms of what I did get finished. It wasn't for want of effort and planning. I'm just not as talented in that area as I might initially appear. The ability to post a short passionate non-fiction post about something I care about from time to time (which half the time tends to drift in off-topic rambling anyhow ) is different from the ability to write a lengthy fiction piece with realistic characters and so on and so forth. But I certainly do appreciate your positive assessment of my writing skills based on what you see here. I'm glad there are people who like reading what I write.

 

[Fantine]

Here is a very positive take on the term "cafeteria Catholic" (one that many non-cafeteria Catholics should emulate.)

Religion served "family-style."

Meeting within a community, where good conversation and socialization are an important part of the church experience.

A place where everyone is a "servant" minister--everyone picks up after his or her self and helps clear the table.

Altogether many of the behaviors of the early Church that modern Catholics had gotten away from, and that Vatican II tried to re-emphasize.

 

[helenofbritain]

Totally subscribing to the best thread all December!

 

[April Angel]

I think I'll just end up living with some guilt for the rest of my life (thank you Jesus).

Why do you thank Jesus for the guilt?

It just really amazes me when people blame God or Jesus for Catholic teachings which were written by Popes - and not even under ex cathedra conditions.

 

[colleen]

I try not to use the term, but my mom once read the definition of Cafeteria Catholic in the newspaper and said Hey that's what I am. She doesn't have any problem disagreeing with church teaching. She stays a Catholic, because that's the faith that she knows and was born into, and because she doesn't feel anyone has the right to take her faith away from her. That, and I think the protestant tendancy towards literal interpretation of the bible freaks her out.

I'd much rather someone who might be considered a Cafeteria Catholic stay in the church. If they are a baptized Catholic they would only be getting in it deeper by turning their back on the church. And, I know, because I pray for many of them myself, that they have the prayers of many hoping that they can fully come back to the church and assent to church teaching. I'd rather have someone in the church and struggling then outside the church and completely lost.

 

[Fantine]

How interesting that you are so much more orthodox than your Mom.

When we were kids (your Mom and I, since I assume we are probably close in age,) the nuns always told us that when we grew up we would develop a "mature faith."

I always believed that this meant that I would assimilate my faith into my heart and that, instead of being something outside of me, it would be an integral part of who I was and my relationship with God. And, after a ten year or so hiatus from religion, that's what happened.

But what happened is that parts of it became an integral part of who I was and my relationship with God, and other parts didn't....

And, being a New Yorker surrounded by liberal 1980's Catholics, I assumed that that was how it was for everybody.

Until you young whippersnappers came along and started calling us names....

There are aspects of my faith that are much, much stronger than when I was young....and other aspects that seem to be superfluous and irrelevant. I can recite them in the Creed, but in practice, I just don't think about them. Ever.

I learned as a teenager that it's better to appreciate what I love about my faith than to start questioning and investigating, because that's what made me leave Church for ten, closer to fifteen, years....

As long as I keep them in the very periphery of my mind, everything is fine...

Isn't that how it is for everyone? (Or just everyone born before 1960?)

 

[AMDG]

I learned as a teenager that it's better to appreciate what I love about my faith than to start questioning and investigating, because that's what made me leave Church for ten, closer to fifteen, years....

As long as I keep them in the very periphery of my mind, everything is fine...

Isn't that how it is for everyone? (Or just everyone born before 1960?)

Are you saying that everyone born before 1960 are "cafeteria Catholics" in that they do not investigate the Church? If so, I'd have to say "no". But I would have to agree that in the late '60s and '70s we Catholics did an awful job of catechizing our youth and much was lost. And I also note that the generation of '40s and '50s simply were able to "accept" Catholic teachings without feeling that they had tochallenge authority because they seemed to live in a "gentler" time with a bevy of priests and nuns doing the actual teaching of catechisms.And I have also heard that this present generation is a lot more "orthodox" than the past generation. It is said that "the pendelum is swinging back". Still, I don't think we can just assume that everyone feels the same way.

 

[geocajun]

Why do you thank Jesus for the guilt?

It just really amazes me when people blame God or Jesus for Catholic teachings which were written by Popes - and not even under ex cathedra conditions.

Because I'm catholic, and my church teaches that Jesus speaks to us through the teachings of the church.

 

[Fish and Bread]

Why do you thank Jesus for the guilt?

It just really amazes me when people blame God or Jesus for Catholic teachings which were written by Popes - and not even under ex cathedra conditions.

I don't want to speak for geocajun, but what he said makes sense to me. According to the precepts of Christianity, Jesus is God. According more specifically to Roman Catholicism, he built a Church and gave Peter and his successors the power to bind and loose. Of course, if one believes that God demands we follow the Pope's teachings, one is going to blame God for the teachings one has issues with.

Truth be told, I blame God too. I don't think he'd (as in the almighty) even argue with me in the sense that he'd agree that the teachings of his Church are ultimately his responsibility, generally. He might argue with my point that he bares some responsibility for everything that happens in the world, because of the way he set it up and when he chooses to interfere or not to interfere, but that's kind of a side issue, and probably a discussion for another time.

 

[BillH]

Don't have time to read the whole thread, but I think that "cafeteria Catholic" is a term more or less like "fascist". The functional definition is "a Catholic whose opinions I disagree with strongly."

 

[Globalnomad]

WOW, how did I manage to miss the last two pages of this thread? It has become even better than before!

I resonate to Jack's musings on the political community and its responsibility. Let me reply as soon as I have the time.

Fantine; I could have written that last message of yours myself! EXACTLY the way I feel. (But then, we both already know we are kindred souls. A question of generation perhaps? No, not only.)

Geo, hats off to your sincerity (again, no surprise) - and prayers. PLEASE don't let this destroy your joy about Catholicism - I sense a bit of gloom in your latest posts (not this thread). Let's continue to be "happy children of God", as Yuanshen put it so memorably a couple of weeks ago!

I'll be back.

 

[Caedmon]

There are aspects of my faith that are much, much stronger than when I was young....and other aspects that seem to be superfluous and irrelevant. I can recite them in the Creed, but in practice, I just don't think about them. Ever.

I learned as a teenager that it's better to appreciate what I love about my faith than to start questioning and investigating, because that's what made me leave Church for ten, closer to fifteen, years....

As long as I keep them in the very periphery of my mind, everything is fine...

Isn't that how it is for everyone? (Or just everyone born before 1960?)

I think that's how it's starting to work for me. I really play up the things that I like about my religion, and the other things that I have a hard time dealing with, I sort of let sit on the shelf. There are some teachings I think are odd or that I have a hard time accepting. And then there are things that I just plain don't agree with, and I've grown less and less concerned about it. Because in the great scheme of things, a differing opinion held by a nobody American with no major political or social position isn't going to have an earth-shattering effect. Noone ever talks about it, not in social situations, not at family gatherings (or at least they shouldn't), priests don't talk about it in homilies. So, all things considered, it doesn't matter if you disagree or have a hard time with a few things, because all the complicated theological gymnastics written down by theologians doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot when it comes to every day life, because it just isn't relevant. The fact that theologians use the word "transubstantiation" doesn't mean a hill of beans to the common parishioner who makes the sign of the cross after receiving the Eucharist. I think you can heap so much explanation and detail work onto a concept that you start to value the explanation over the concept itself.