"Cafeteria Catholic" need a definition as to what it means

[fix]

So, in this area, I exercise my informed conscience, in opposition to the leadership of the Church.

I also know that the bishops and the entire leadership of the Church are just men. Men who can err. Men who have erred. And men who will err again.

I am responsible for doing the right as I understand it, to the best of my ability. And I use all the tools of the Church to guide me.

Here is the problem:

…We think well when we understand moral principles and apply them in clear and reasonable ways; we think badly when we ignore or reinvent moral principles, or apply them in ambiguous and unreasonable ways. “Good conscience,” in this way of understanding, means a good grasp and a good application of moral truth—for it is the truth that remains primary, the truth that is grasped and applied by the practical mind.

…In a passage in the Letter to the Duke of Norfolk (quoted in the Catechism of the Catholic Church), he writes: “Conscience is not a long-sighted selfishness, nor a desire to be consistent with oneself; but it is a messenger from Him, Who, both in nature and grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by His representatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ.”

In other words, a Catholic conscience cannot accept a settled position against the Church, at least on a central moral teaching. Any difficulty with Church teaching should be not the end of the matter but the beginning of a process of conversion, education, and quite possibly repentance. Where a Catholic disagrees with the Church on some serious matter, the response should not be “that’s that—I can’t follow the Church here.” Instead we should kneel and pray that God will lead our weak steps and enlighten our fragile minds, as Newman recommends in his Sermon 17, “The Testimony of Conscience.

firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0505/articles/pell.html

 

[cheese_sdc]

Seems a bit circular to me. You can exercise freedom of conscience, but only if you completely agree with the Church.

 

[fix]

Seems a bit circular to me. You can exercise freedom of conscience, but only if you completely agree with the Church.

I don’t think it is circular. It means we must have a correct notion of conscience. So, no one may force you to act against your conscience. But, that does not mean your choice is correct or renders you free from guilt.

I think the CCC sums it up well:

1786 Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

 

[Orionthehunter]

Seems a bit circular to me. You can exercise freedom of conscience, but only if you completely agree with the Church.

I understand you confusion. It is rooted in what I call lazy semantics in the US. We interchange words that are similar but not exact. If you have ever observed my posts I sometimes argue over what many consider arcane or minor issues related to the choice of words. But words mean something so that we can accurately and precisely communicate thoughts and Teaching.

In short we are given our mind, will and conscience so we might discern the Truth. We are not given our mind, will and conscience so we might determine the Truth. The Truth is from God. He determines the Truth. It is our call to discern the Truth. He is the Creator. We are the Creation.

Discern: To percieve or recognize clearly.
Determine: To settle conclusively, to be the deciding factor in.

We don’t determine what is right or wrong, God does. Our challenge is to discover/discern what is right and wrong. We are not the authority, God is.

I’m assuming by your comments in your previous post in opposing the “Defense of Marriage Act” yet your later comment that we to interpret nothing in this position as a reflection of your views about the morality of homosexual acts.

Am I correct to assume that your views are one of the following:

1. You consider homosexual acts as immoral but you oppose secular legal discrimination between couples who join together in heterosexual sacramental marriage and homosexual non-sacramental “marriage.”
2. You consider homosexual acts as moral and thus you oppose secular legal discrimination between couples who join together in heterosexual marriage and homosexual marriage.

Because the answer you give to the above have different implications, I’d appreciate an understanding of your position before expanding. Thanks.

 

[Penny_Plain]

In short we are given our mind, will and conscience so we might discern the Truth. We are not given our mind, will and conscience so we might determine the Truth. The Truth is from God. He determines the Truth. It is our call to discern the Truth. He is the Creator. We are the Creation.

Discern: To percieve or recognize clearly.
Determine: To settle conclusively, to be the deciding factor in.

We don’t determine what is right or wrong, God does. Our challenge is to discover/discern what is right and wrong. We are not the authority, God is.

That is very well said, and I think it points out the reason that the self-styled orthodox Catholics have their undies in a bundle about us “cafeteria Catholics.”

Speaking for myself (for whom else could I speak, really?), the lack of communication between the two camps comes from this distinction. I am trying to discern the will of God. Because I reach different conclusions from you, you accuse me of determining it.

As Orion points out, it’s not the same thing at all. We see through a glass, darkly, and we reach different conclusions. Eventually, we will find out who is right. (My prediction: none of us…) The constant accusations that we CCs “pick and choose” what we believe based on sloth, convenience, or personal immorality shows either (a) lack of understanding of who we are and what we believe or (b) a deliberate attempt to provoke.

 

[fix]

That is very well said, and I think it points out the reason that the self-styled orthodox Catholics have their undies in a bundle about us “cafeteria Catholics.”

Speaking for myself (for whom else could I speak, really?), the lack of communication between the two camps comes from this distinction. I am trying to discern the will of God. Because I reach different conclusions from you, you accuse me of determining it.

As Orion points out, it’s not the same thing at all. We see through a glass, darkly, and we reach different conclusions. Eventually, we will find out who is right. (My prediction: none of us…) The constant accusations that we CCs “pick and choose” what we believe based on sloth, convenience, or personal immorality shows either (a) lack of understanding of who we are and what we believe or (b) a deliberate attempt to provoke.

What is left out in his post and your post is that the Church speaks as God. We have right reason. That our consciences do not perceive the truth at all the same time or at the exact same levels of clarity does not mean we all are wrong. It does mean that truth is superior. It means we must assent to the truth to have a properly formed conscience and it means the Church is the authority.

Just to confuse the issue further part of the problem is we often have a false understanding of conscience, but we also have a false understanding of freedom.

That we have the power to choose evil, does not mean we are free to do so. We are only free to choose good.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

That is very well said, and I think it points out the reason that the self-styled orthodox Catholics have their undies in a bundle about us “cafeteria Catholics.”

Speaking for myself (for whom else could I speak, really?), the lack of communication between the two camps comes from this distinction. I am trying to discern the will of God. Because I reach different conclusions from you, you accuse me of determining it.

As Orion points out, it’s not the same thing at all. We see through a glass, darkly, and we reach different conclusions. Eventually, we will find out who is right. (My prediction: none of us…) The constant accusations that we CCs “pick and choose” what we believe based on sloth, convenience, or personal immorality shows either (a) lack of understanding of who we are and what we believe or (b) a deliberate attempt to provoke.

How do you separate the will of God from the Church that He founded? Do you believe that Jesus Himself is Truth, Truth that cannot be contradicted yet He will leave it up to us to see what of His doctrines “fit”? What criteria is your basis for “fittiness”?

 

[YinYangMom]

I am trying to discern the will of God. Because I reach different conclusions from you, you accuse me of determining it.

The Church holds the deposit of Faith given to Her by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Remember that all the Truth they would need for that time and for all time until He returns was deposited with them in those tongues of fire. It was basically the schematics and blueprints for what the Church would need to see the faithful through to the End Times. Some of that was put into Scripture, some of it was developed into Tradition, and that whose time had yet to come was to be passed on by the guding hand of the Spirit as needed (thus whenever a council is convened to examine matters on faith and morals we have the assurance the outcome will be True). The Church is a living, breathing entity, constantly being guided by the Holy Spirit.

Truth is not something one needs to seek out anymore.
The Catholic Church has revealed God’s Truth to mankind.
She lives it, she guards it, she teaches it, she invites all to enter into it.

That you do not agree with the Church’s teachings is **not **a matter of discerning whether or not the teachings are True. We have the promise of Christ that it is. It’s a matter of knowingly and willingly rejecting the authority of the Church on matters of faith and morals, to which Jesus Himself has promised could never be in error.

I go back to Humanae Vitae because it is one such document which has the seal of infallibility to the teachings contained therein.

It’s available for all to read.
One need not question whether or not it is Truth.
We are assured it is such by the promise of Christ.
Our obligation is to lend our will to assent to the Truth presented in the teaching.

 

[Orionthehunter]

That is very well said, and I think it points out the reason that the self-styled orthodox Catholics have their undies in a bundle about us “cafeteria Catholics.”

Speaking for myself (for whom else could I speak, really?), the lack of communication between the two camps comes from this distinction. I am trying to discern the will of God. Because I reach different conclusions from you, you accuse me of determining it.

As Orion points out, it’s not the same thing at all. We see through a glass, darkly, and we reach different conclusions. Eventually, we will find out who is right. (My prediction: none of us…) The constant accusations that we CCs “pick and choose” what we believe based on sloth, convenience, or personal immorality shows either (a) lack of understanding of who we are and what we believe or (b) a deliberate attempt to provoke.

Penny, while I appreciate your compliment, I want to be clear. I think what gets the goat of those who express opposition to your positions is related to what we see as as lack of an attitude of assent and obey. As Catholics when we find mind and will in opposition to the Church we are called to take the issue to prayer for counsel from the Holy Spirit so we might properly discern. When one says they have reached a conclusion contrary to the Church, they do present it as an equal conclusion to that of the Church. It is not equal. God is the Truth and He gave us Tradition, Scripture and Teaching so that we can find the Truth. When our truth conflicts with the Truth as taught through Tradition, Scripture, and Teaching, our personal call is for us to reconcile the difference until the conflict is removed.

To paraphrase St. Jerome’s comment about Scripture, if my understanding of truth conflicts with the Teaching of the Church, it isn’t the Teaching that is wrong but my understanding of it. The burden is on me and not the Church.

To summarize it, if one asserts they struggle with a Teaching, they need to work to reconcile it. This is a component of our journey to know God better. But, when one asserts they oppose a Teaching, they are making a claim of being a Magisterium of one. This is not a proper use of our mind, will and conscience as none of our gifts from God are to be exercised in opposition to the I AM.

 

[Penny_Plain]

That you do not agree with the Church’s teachings is **not **a matter of discerning whether or not the teachings are True. We have the promise of Christ that it is. It’s a matter of knowingly and willingly rejecting the authority of the Church on matters of faith and morals, to which Jesus Himself has promised could never be in error.

This is just as circular as the definition of a “properly formed conscience.” The only possible answer to discernment is yours, and a process that reaches any other answer therefore is not proper discernment but something corrupt and flawed.

Hmmm…

It’s a matter of knowingly and willingly rejecting the authority of the Church on matters of faith and morals, to which Jesus Himself has promised could never be in error.

And one is not permitted to discern the truth of this claim? Because, frankly (after prayer and all that good stuff that the orthodox seem to be convinced we don’t do) it still strikes me as … well … overreaching.

But perhaps now you’ll tell me I’m not praying right.

 

[fix]

This is just as circular as the definition of a “properly formed conscience.” The only possible answer to discernment is yours, and a process that reaches any other answer therefore is not proper discernment but something corrupt and flawed.

What is circular about reasoning that each conscience is not the inventer of right and wrong? If I follow your thought each person can arrive at an opposing conclusion and each is correct? How is that logical?

 

[Penny_Plain]

What is circular about reasoning that each conscience is not the inventer of right and wrong? If I follow your thought each person can arrive at an opposing conclusion and each is correct? How is that logical?

Fix, go back to Orion’s distinction between determination and discernment.

Have I said anywhere that each conscience “invents” right and wrong? I haven’t.

 

[fix]

Fix, go back to Orion’s distinction between determination and discernment.

Have I said anywhere that each conscience “invents” right and wrong? I haven’t.

…This metaphor of “messenger” is key. When we receive messages, we do not make them up or rephrase them in order to make them say what we wish had been said. And thus, if we disagree with the Church’s message so seriously that we cannot follow its terms, we cannot reinvent that message to make it easier or more palatable. Rather, we enter into a period of prayer, study, and enquiry to try to understand the message and to understand why we find ourselves opposed to it. And if the matter that puzzles us is one of a binding Church teaching or a central moral teaching, then this may prove a lifetime’s work…
firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0505/articles/pell.html

When you claim you are not inventing, but discerning the truth, that would mean you have some objective measure to compare against. How do you reconcile that your objective measure is not actually subjective?

 

[YinYangMom]

This is just as circular as the definition of a “properly formed conscience.” The only possible answer to discernment is yours, and a process that reaches any other answer therefore is not proper discernment but something corrupt and flawed.

Not my way, the Lord’s way. BIG distinction.

And one is not permitted to discern the truth of this claim? Because, frankly (after prayer and all that good stuff that the orthodox seem to be convinced we don’t do) it still strikes me as … well … overreaching.

Ah, I see now that the reason you’re ‘stuck’, so to speak, is that you question infallibility, and that makes perfect sense. It’s a big hurdle to overcome, I admit, but there are so many good writings out there to shed light on the subject that it is possible to do so.

I suspect you would resist any effort to do so, as you do not see it as a hurdle to overcome, but rather something you’ve already researched and concluded to be wrong, and therefore your conscience is clear to continue rejecting the authority of the church’s magesterial teachings.

But as Orion points out, Truth is. God defines it. He reveals it. The Church protects and disseminates it. Our obligation is to accept it and live according to it. It is not our place to contradict or reject it. That’s not what discernment is about.

But perhaps now you’ll tell me I’m not praying right.

That would be plain silly.

 

[dessert]

THE ESSCENCE OF THE SPIRIT
Truth makes known the mystery
Desending upon us all
Jesus summons us from the sinking fall

The essence of the ooil of the Spirit flows
Baptizing and covering our sin
With forgiveness and a promise
If we will let Him in

Come join in communion with the spirit of the Lord
The divine invitation stands
As the Helpe wants to fill yoou
One and every penitant man

 The third person
  The  Holy Spirit is His Name
 Witness  to us He became

  Truth is the oil of the Spirit
   Our God's esscence 
  And by receiving the invitation
  We can know His  Presence 
 I wrote this after last weeks mass, when I receive discernment, it is from the  Spirit not my concsience    Desert, return

 

[setter]

Penny, while I appreciate your compliment, I want to be clear. I think what gets the goat of those who express opposition to your positions is related to what we see as as lack of an attitude of assent and obey. As Catholics when we find mind and will in opposition to the Church we are called to take the issue to prayer for counsel from the Holy Spirit so we might properly discern. When one says they have reached a conclusion contrary to the Church, they do present it as an equal conclusion to that of the Church. It is not equal. God is the Truth and He gave us Tradition, Scripture and Teaching so that we can find the Truth. When our truth conflicts with the Truth as taught through Tradition, Scripture, and Teaching, our personal call is for us to reconcile the difference until the conflict is removed.

To paraphrase St. Jerome’s comment about Scripture, if my understanding of truth conflicts with the Teaching of the Church, it isn’t the Teaching that is wrong but my understanding of it. The burden is on me and not the Church.

To summarize it, if one asserts they struggle with a Teaching, they need to work to reconcile it. This is a component of our journey to know God better. But, when one asserts they oppose a Teaching, they are making a claim of being a Magisterium of one. This is not a proper use of our mind, will and conscience as none of our gifts from God are to be exercised in opposition to the I AM.

IOW, “cafeteria” Catholics have an attitude and will problem in refusing the inevitable conclusion of discernment – the Church is always right in matters of faith and morals, no matter how long it takes for one to [hopefully] arrive there. Would that holding out “cafeteria” Catholics (who should know better) would cut through the chase, give one’s holy assent and obedience in behavior and will, and then work backwards from this secure place to educate and gain the understanding that is lacking.