California’s First Lady says she’s ‘a Cafeteria Catholic’

[JSSebastianoP]

All the Kennedy’s make their own rules. I think as we watch the current news we see that. That Maria is herself admitting that she is a Catholic of the cafeteria type, well she thinks this is cute too. How clever Maria! I don’t judge her, but I am very disappointed in that entire family. To those on the outside looking in, the Kennedy’s give Catholics a very bad name.

How true… It is saddening that here in New York Caroline Kennedy is trying to take the possibly empty senate seat from which Mrs. Clinton may leave to join Mr. Obama.
Peace.

 

[yellowbicycle]

Cafeteria Catholic?
Can I be a Cafeteria wife? Faithful to my husband at all times, except Tuesdays and Thursdays? Can I be a cafeteria mother? I’ll only care about one of my two children at any given time.
I guess I just don’t get it. If you don’t agree with the Catholic faith, then don’t be a part of it. It’s not like the mob. You CAN get out. Just stop going to church. See how easy?

If Maria REALLY had courage, she would say what she is - raised in the faith, but left the faith. See? That’s not so bad now is it?

And there IS a difference between outright rejecting what Catholicism teaches and struggling with her teachings. I struggle to understand and live by her teachings. I think everyone here does. But I accept them. If she doesn’t accept them, why is she pretending that she’s still Catholic?

 

[a_cermak]

If I remember rightly, only the clergy are required to give positive assent to all Church teachings. The laity are only required to obey. Since she goes to mass weekly, she seems to be obeying more than many Catholics around the world. There is no indication that she actively disobeys any other teachings of the Catholic Church. Why would she therefore be a lousy Catholic? It sounds like her disputes are more on the intellectual level than on the practical level.

 

[fix]

If I remember rightly, only the clergy are required to give positive assent to all Church teachings. The laity are only required to obey. Since she goes to mass weekly, she seems to be obeying more than many Catholics around the world. There is no indication that she actively disobeys any other teachings of the Catholic Church. Why would she therefore be a lousy Catholic? It sounds like her disputes are more on the intellectual level than on the practical level.

Which teachings may anyone reject?

 

[fix]

**ARTICLE 3
THE CHURCH, MOTHER AND TEACHER

**2037 The law of God entrusted to the Church is taught to the faithful as the way of life and truth. The faithful therefore have the *right *to be instructed in the divine saving precepts that purify judgment and, with grace, heal wounded human reason.79 They have the *duty *of observing the constitutions and decrees conveyed by the legitimate authority of the Church. Even if they concern disciplinary matters, these determinations call for docility in charity.

2039 Ministries should be exercised in a spirit of fraternal service and dedication to the Church, in the name of the Lord.81 At the same time the conscience of each person should avoid confining itself to individualistic considerations in its moral judgments of the person’s own acts. As far as possible conscience should take account of the good of all, as expressed in the moral law, natural and revealed, and consequently in the law of the Church and in the authoritative teaching of the Magisterium on moral questions. Personal conscience and reason should not be set in opposition to the moral law or the Magisterium of the Church.

 

[SwizzleStick]

I posted this in another thread, but it works well here too, so:

SwizzleStick:

A great editorial from our St. Louis Review:

December 12, 2008

"May I see your Catholic I.D., please?​

How sad that so many in our American society today dare to claim the title “Catholic” yet are charged so aptly by Bishop Robert Hermann and others as largely having lost the true Catholic identity. Indeed, authentically to be called Jesus’ disciple necessarily entails full commitment to a whole way of life; a way of being; a way of becoming. It requires full orientation and concentration; lukewarm is worse than cold.

Being a Roman Catholic should be the most challenging, demanding and rewarding thing about us. Is being know as “Catholics” making us any different from what we would otherwise be were we to choose some other religious affiliation, or even no faith designation whatsoever? If our Catholicity does not make us radically conspicuous in a world whose heart runs largely counter to that of Jesus, then we have taken a most beautiful name and made it an empty, hollow shell.

We have heard it so often from politicians, legislators, governmental officials, Supreme Court justices and others that it has become a cliche: “I shall not let my Catholic faith get in the way of or even influence the discharge of my responsibilities of office.” (Translation: “I will say or do whatever I think gives me the best chance of being elected or appointed.”) …

For entire article see: stlouisreview.com/archive/editorials.php

Also, a very good response letter (the second letter in the link below) to the above article reads in part:

Editor:

Many thanks for the courage to write and publish the editorial “May I see your Catholic I.D., please?” in the Dec. 12 Review.

For too long those struggling to remain faithful to God have been stunned, saddened and often frustrated by our Catholic brothers and sisters who, having been negatively influenced by and fallen to the temptations that come from the purveyor of the culture of death that exists in our country and our world, are trying to redefine our Catholic beliefs.

While so many of us working hard to strengthen our faith and stay obedient, humble and docile to His will grow impatient with these sad souls, we must remember the teachings of Pope John Paul the Great who had these children of God in mind when he spoke in his homily of Sept. 13, 1987:

“To all those who have distanced themselves from the Sacrament of Reconciliation and from the Love that forgives, I make this exhortation: Come back to this source of grace. Do not be afraid! Christ Himself awaits you. He will heal you and you will be at peace with God!” …

stlouisreview.com/article.php?id=16630

 

[Strider]

Here is an interesting tidbit. Sister Joan was among those speaking at Maria Shrivers 2008 Women’s Conference.
I’m not really up on who’s who on the guest list of speakers.

No pun intended, but a look at that list of all the “Beautiful People,” is something to behold . The short bio’s were interesting; names dropped (Oprah, etc.), and all those powerful women. I keep hearing about the “glass ceiling,” but there was no sign of it there.
So why was "Sister Joan’s blog so full of the rage, the rage of fading gender feminism? Fortunately, her bunch is passing out of the picture; geting old and running out of steam. The young people want Truth and structure, not dissent.
If this the company Maria keeps, no wonder she’s a “cafeteria Catholic,” which is really no Catholic at all.

 

[puppypatrol]

No pun intended, but a look at that list of all the “Beautiful People,” is something to behold . The short bio’s were interesting; names dropped (Oprah, etc.), and all those powerful women. I keep hearing about the “glass ceiling,” but there was no sign of it there.
So why was "Sister Joan’s blog so full of the rage, the rage of fading gender feminism? Fortunately, her bunch is passing out of the picture; geting old and running out of steam. The young people want Truth and structure, not dissent.
If this the company Maria keeps, no wonder she’s a “cafeteria Catholic,” which is really no Catholic at all.

Actually, I find the list very scarey!

 

[Fitz]

For me to say anything more would be hateful, so I only pray for the fallen away Kennedy’s. It is a long list as we all know. One of Bob Kennedy’s daughters wrote a book about prominent Catholics. It is full of fallen aways. Go figure.

 

[NonCatholic]

For me to say anything more would be hateful, so I only pray for the fallen away Kennedy’s. It is a long list as we all know. One of Bob Kennedy’s daughters wrote a book about prominent Catholics. It is full of fallen aways. Go figure.

Isn’t this pretty typical in today’s U.S. Catholic society? I know quite a few Catholics, who doesn’t, LOL…anyway, most of them, not all of them, would fit into this “cafeteria style” of RCC. The exceptions that I know are in my own family, one rejects Vatican II and the other two consider themselves as devout and accept Vatican II: the Vatican II thing has caused some problems between siblings (two aunts and an uncle).

 

[Soutane]

Is there ONE Kenedy left who could be called an orthodox Catholic?

 

[Fitz]

Is there ONE Kenedy left who could be called an orthodox Catholic?

I think Rose Kennedy was the only one to be a faithful Catholic, but not sure of all of them. There are so many. We know Jackie O was not too religious, nor Teddy- buying his annulment and remarrying after he drowned the girl in a drunken escapade. I am very sceptical of the Boston diocese due to the Kennedy’s exceptional closeness to the Catholic Church regardless of behavior.

 

[Roger_Wissinger]

Is there ONE Kenedy left who could be called an orthodox Catholic?

I was going to ask the same question. Can anyone name one Kennedy that believes in the Catholic Church and its teachings?

It’s seems all of them are confused. I guess being on TV and being a Kennedy is tough. It seems that they need prayers.

I’m getting kinda of tired of these so called “Catholics” coming out and going against Christ’s church.

It’s hard enough trying to go out and tell people about being Catholic when there’s so many mixed signals from these so called Catholics.

Why don’t these Kennedy’s go to another church that falls into their believes instead of trying to change the church?

 

[pnewton]

A stupid Catholic really.

Anyone who says ‘I pick and choose’ really is ignorant of the faith and never really put much effort in studying it.

Wrong on the stupid part, correct on the ignorant. The two words mean castly different things. The fact that she views her postition as acceptable shows an ignorace of Catholicism. Since she spent so much time in Catholic schools and Mass, one has to question why she remained ignorant. As KCT put it:

Typical member of an uncatechized generation.

Yet another poster said:

To blame Rome and the Bishops is a ridiculous excuse for anyone, especially in this modern age.

Sorry to disagree, but leadership entails blame. Read Ezekiel. When the watchman fails to warn the sinner, he will be held accountable for the sin. Anyone who is a leader understands this. It is the responsibility of priests, bishops and Catholic schools to ensure proper education of the faithful. The resources you mention are all well and good, but one must first be aware of a need for them.

 

[pnewton]

Which teachings may anyone reject?

Actually the Catholic Church teaching on conscience does allow for disbelieving Church teaching. There are several caveats, though. For one, the person needs to try and grow in the understanding of the Church teaching so that his conscience will be better formed. This is a process. As some have pointed out, those of you who have “arrived” must not throw stones at those who are still working out some issues. A smoldering wick we must not extinguish or the bruised reed crush. Also, any area of dogma should be believed, to the extent possible, with the assent of faith. These areas are not many. Anyone who has converted understands that even dogma takes a while to digest. Sometimes the best assent we can give is “I guess so.”

 

[fix]

Actually the Catholic Church teaching on conscience does allow for disbelieving Church teaching. There are several caveats, though. For one, the person needs to try and grow in the understanding of the Church teaching so that his conscience will be better formed. This is a process. As some have pointed out, those of you who have “arrived” must not throw stones at those who are still working out some issues. A smoldering wick we must not extinguish or the bruised reed crush. Also, any area of dogma should be believed, to the extent possible, with the assent of faith. These areas are not many. Anyone who has converted understands that even dogma takes a while to digest. Sometimes the best assent we can give is “I guess so.”

I guess we should be precise about how we describe these issues. I asked what teachings one may reject, not that one cannot have personal difficulties in understanding.

Voluntary doubt about the faith disregards or refuses to hold as true what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief. Involuntary doubt refers to hesitation in believing, difficulty in overcoming objections connected with the faith, or also anxiety aroused by its obscurity. If deliberately cultivated doubt can lead to spiritual blindness.

2089 *Incredulity *is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it…

**2039 **… At the same time the conscience of each person should avoid confining itself to individualistic considerations in its moral judgments of the person’s own acts. As far as possible conscience should take account of the good of all, as expressed in the moral law, natural and revealed, and consequently in the law of the Church and in the authoritative teaching of the Magisterium on moral questions. Personal conscience and reason should not be set in opposition to the moral law or the Magisterium of the Church.

The freedom of the act of faith cannot justify a right to dissent. In fact this freedom does not indicate at all freedom with regard to the truth but signifies the free self-determination of the person in conformity with his moral obligation to accept the truth…One cannot then appeal to these rights of man in order to oppose the interventions of the Magisterium. Such behavior fails to recognize the nature and mission of the Church which has received from the Lord the task to proclaim the truth of salvation to all men… Finally, argumentation appealing to the obligation to follow one’s own conscience cannot legitimate dissent. This is true, first of all, because conscience illumines the practical judgment about a decision to make, while here we are concerned with the truth of a doctrinal pronouncement This is furthermore the case because while the theologian, like every believer, must follow his conscience, he is also obliged to form it. Conscience is not an independent and infallible faculty. It is an act of moral judgement regarding a responsible choice. A right conscience is one duly illumined by faith and by the objective moral law and it presupposes, as well, the uprightness of the will in the pursuit of the true good.

… Setting up a supreme magisterium of conscience in opposition to the magisterium of the Church means adopting a principle of free examination incompatible with the economy of Revelation and its transmission in the Church and thus also with a correct understanding of theology and the role of the theologian…
**
DONUM** VERITATIS

 

[pnewton]

I guess we should be precise about how we describe these issues. I asked what teachings one may reject, not that one cannot have personal difficulties in understanding.

I was referring instead to:

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.

Obviously, there is a great deal more information. I do not think the passage on dissent applies, at least not here and at this time. Shriver is not holding herself out as a spokesperson for the Catholic Church, not is she disobeying any directive handed down to her from the Holy Father. In fact, based on the article, I did not see any disobedience at all, just disagreement.
Let me give and example of the difference, even though in my case the issue is one of prudential judgement as opposed to dogma - Capital punishment. Even thouch I know I can believe as I do, I knew I was in opposition to Pope John Paul II. Therefore, while trying to understand more clearly why he taught as he did, and disagreeing all the time with him on the subject, I have choosene to remain silent are work on the subject, and it is a frequent topic. I do not want to mislead anybody in mistaking my disagreement with Catholic teaching. I have held myself out as a Catholic so strongly that if I were to start commenting some would think that it was Catholic teaching. So I stay silent. I hope Ms. Shriver will do likewise.

 

[pprimeau1976]

I just want to comment on this little blurb:

I consider myself a Catholic in good standing

I think that whether you are a cafeteria Catholic or a Catholic who accept all that the Church teaches (are these clean-plater Catholics ) this is a presumptuous statement. Isn’t it God’s job (or the bishop’s job) to determine one’s standing? I guess there are pharisees on both sides.

 

[Roger_Wissinger]

I just want to comment on this little blurb:I think that whether you are a cafeteria Catholic or a Catholic who accept all that the Church teaches (are these clean-plater Catholics ) this is a presumptuous statement. Isn’t it God’s job (or the bishop’s job) to determine one’s standing? I guess there are pharisees on both sides.

I believe that when you have these political figures like Kennedy, Pelosi, Biden, professing that they are Catholic and go against church teaching, we are do correct them.
There are so many confused Catholics.
When ask what’s wrong with the Catholic Church G.K. Chesterton replied, “Me”.

 

[lizaanne]

There have been some outstanding Vortex episodes about this topic:

What to do about Maria?

Hyannis Huddle

Bishops and Catholic Politicians

~Liza