What's wrong with being a "Cafeteria Catholic"?

[polonius]

Cafeteria Catholic
The term is most often used by conservative Catholics critical of progressive Catholics. It is less frequently applied to the conservatives who dissent from other Catholic moral teaching on issues such as social justice, capital punishment, the care of the environment or just war.

Conservative Catholics argue this is because these areas of Catholic teaching are not definitively dogmatically defined by the Magisterium, and therefore not unchanging infallible (from a Catholic standpoint) dogmata.

The term has been in use since the issuance of Humanae Vitae, an official document that propounded the Church's opposition to the use of artificial birth control and advocates natural family planning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cafeteria_Catholicism.

Question: Are Catholics bound to give assent to a Catholic teaching they believe to be in error

[Elijah John]

I respect the “loud and proud� atheist. I have no respect for the Progressive Christian who is a cowardly atheist.

Wow, that's a loaded statement. Progressive Christians are not atheists, with some exceptions.

For example, I am conservative when it comes to morals, but theologically progressive or liberal. I believe in the ten Commandments, and in YHVH, God of Jesus, but do not believe that Jesus is God.

There's a difference.

Most believe in God, take the Bible seriously, not literally, and see conscience and reason as "God-given gifts" not "fallen" things to be distrusted.

[Zzyzx]

.

The problem with being a “Cafeteria Catholic� is that it is inherently self-centered, regardless if we are talking about progress or conservative Catholics.

How is that a problem? It is exactly what you and every other Christian does UNLESS you / they follow every teaching of their religion to the letter.

Even Traditionalists / Fundamentalists / Literalists depart from the teachings of their religion saying “that does not apply to me.�

It means that I choose what I want to believe and how I want to live. Instead of molding my life after Christ, I mold the teachings of Christ to fit my life. The “Cafeteria Catholic� has inverted the selflessness inherent in Catholic teaching (and really all Christian teaching), and made belief to be “all about me.�

Exactly. That is indicated by 40,000 denominational versions of Christianity and untold millions of individual versions.

Where does yours fit in?

[polonius]

bjs posted:

The problem with being a “Cafeteria Catholic� is that it is inherently self-centered, regardless if we are talking about progress or conservative Catholics. It means that I choose what I want to believe and how I want to live. Instead of molding my life after Christ, I mold the teachings of Christ to fit my life. The “Cafeteria Catholic� has inverted the selflessness inherent in Catholic teaching (and really all Christian teaching), and made belief to be “all about me.�

RESPONSE:

Are you sidestepping the main issue of whether believers must accept without question whatever is taught or has been taught by their faith group.

For example, do Catholics have to believe that there are only Catholics in heaven?

[polonius]

Those accused of being “Cafeteria Catholics� are called that because they slice, dice, and julienne the teachings of their Church while inflicting themselves upon their Catholic brethren. Take Charles Anyperson. He is a faithful Catholic who follows all of the teachings of his church but who has “progressive Catholics� in his parish who want female priests. He, of course, has nowhere to go since few churches with priests still have an all-male priesthood. The Progressives, however, have more in common with Episcopalians. Rather than go to the Church that comports with their personal theology, they insist on remaining in the RCC in order to ram reform down everyone else’s throat that is perfectly happy with current RCC teaching.

I respect the “loud and proud� atheist. I have no respect for the Progressive Christian who is a cowardly atheist.

RESPONSE:

The issue isn't who you respect but which views are correct.

[polonius]

A "cafeteria Catholic" is one who picks and chooses what to swallow from what is being presented to them, and what to ignore. Conservative Catholics prefer to believe that they are more righteous because they swallow all of it without reservation. Which is of course bogus. When was the last time a good Catholic man sold his daughter into slavery? (Exodus 21:7) When was the last time anyone was put to death for not observing the Sabbath? (Exodus 35.2) When was the last time ANY conservative Catholic refused to wear clothing of mixed materials? (Lev. 19:19) There are prohibitions and commandments in the Bible which are pure nonsense, and they are routinely NOT swallowed.

RESPONSE: Perhaps St. Paul summarized it best when he urged Christians to test everything and to put away childish things?

[otseng]

I have no respect for the Progressive Christian who is a cowardly atheist.

Moderator Final Warning

This is an uncivil and a blanket comment. Please refrain from both.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator final warnings serve as the last strike towards users. Additional violations will result in a probation vote. Further infractions will lead to banishment. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Strider324]

A "cafeteria Catholic" is one who picks and chooses what to swallow from what is being presented to them, and what to ignore.

Oxford defines your usage of the word “swallow� as “to believe unquestioningly (as in a lie or unlikely assertion)�, which is pejorative/disparaging/belittling of those Catholics.

Conservative Catholics prefer to believe that they are more righteous because they swallow all of it without reservation.

I think that when we belittle another group of people as simple-minded bumpkins that we should perhaps refrain from commenting on their alleged self-righteousness.

And yet Catholics DO believe in 'a lie or unlikely assertion' when they believe 'unquestioningly' that they can literally 'swallow' god when they eat a cracker. If you find this reality 'pejorative', so be it.

[JLB32168]

And yet Catholics DO believe in 'a lie or unlikely assertion' when they believe 'unquestioningly' that they can literally 'swallow' god when they eat a cracker.

I wasn’t aware that they proved Aristotle’s philosophy of Essence/Accidents was a complete lie.

Of course, we both know that “Transubstantiation is a Lie� is personal opinion and nothing more. When you have established as fact that Transubstantiation is a lie then your opinion will be fact.

As for me, I don’t have to prove anything since I’ve not asserted anything.

[Strider324]

And yet Catholics DO believe in 'a lie or unlikely assertion' when they believe 'unquestioningly' that they can literally 'swallow' god when they eat a cracker.

I wasn’t aware that they proved Aristotle’s philosophy of Essence/Accidents was a complete lie.

Of course, we both know that “Transubstantiation is a Lie� is personal opinion and nothing more. When you have established as fact that Transubstantiation is a lie then your opinion will be fact.

As for me, I don’t have to prove anything since I’ve not asserted anything.

Conveniently, you chose to abridge the definition. Why? That seems dishonest. Your fuller definition of 'to swallow' includes 'an unlikely assertion', which eating the flesh and drinking the blood of a god most reasonably is - and has absolutely nothing to do with Aristotle.

Yes, it's well known that you prefer to avoid making assertions, since when you have in the past they have generally been exploded, resulting in you retreating from the field. That's OK, you're hardly the only theist to do so.