Have you heard of the term "cafeteria" catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bettercallpaul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bettercallpaul

Guest
Sorry I hope this is not a derogatory term. We certainly shouldn’t be making fun of regular Communion takers or Church goers. As I approach age 60, I think I am going in that direction myself.
Does it have any other broader meaning? Is there any reason I should not become one?
 
Last edited:
Yes.
It would be better called “buffet” Catholicism, but it doesent have quite the same ring as “Cafeteria catholicism”

It means picking and choosing your beliefs… so “I believe what the Church teaches on the life of Christ, the Real Presence, and papal authority, but I will choose to knowingly and willingly disobey the Church on matters like gay ‘marriage’, abortion, and the all male priesthood.”
 
Last edited:
“Cafeteria Catholic” means a Catholic who rejects any Church teaching he dislikes.
 
I’ve heard it and Catholics generally consider it a derogatory term.

It means somebody who picks and chooses which teachings of the Church to believe in, like say they like the teaching about God’s mercy on sinners, so they believe that, but they don’t like being told not to use contraception, so they decide that teaching is wrong. Etc.

It usually gets used to describe people who have views more “progressive” than whatever the Church, or the person calling them the name, is espousing at the time.

I’d advise against becoming one or describing yourself as such. It’s not considered a good thing to be.
 
OOOOPPPPSSS!!!

I hate to say it, but I once was a cafeteria Catholic! I questioned some major Church beliefs, but don’t anymore. Now I know better.
I guess the Holy Spirit turned my heart and head around in the right direction. And I’m the better for it.

I don’t want cafeteria food, I want the whole banquet!

Stuart
 
I’ve never been divorced but I find the rule for not giving Communion to divorcees who are in a new relationship too strict.
I’d like to say Abortion in absolutely no circumstances. I understand we need zero tolerance rules. But my heart says there need to be very rare exceptions.
So I am a cafeteria catholic then?
 
Last edited:
I think many, if not most, of us can think of one or two issues that we’d like the Church to handle differently or better. The danger in slinging around terms like “cafeteria Catholic” is that it chills any sort of discussion or thought on how things could maybe be improved. I don’t think the Catholic Church really wants an army of robots in the pews saying yes sir, no sir. I appreciate that they don’t want a bunch of activists holding rallys and leading marches on the bishop’s offices either.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
I don’t think the Catholic Church really wants an army of robots in the pews saying yes sir, no sir. I appreciate that they don’t want a bunch of activists holding rallys and leading marches on the bishop’s offices either.
Click to expand...
well said! God gave us a brain. We just have to use it wisely.
 
I think many people are cafeteria Catholics whether they want to admit it or not. Some of the more-Catholic-than-the-Pope folks are also in the cafeteria line.
 
I think it’s better for them to be part of the Church and grumbling about something, than leave entirely and do themselves more spiritual damage by being away from the real Jesus Christ.
 
A view expressed this way makes the Church sound stubbornly totalitarian and authoritarian. Is that what you want? I don’t think Pope Francis would express a view like that?
 
Look, I understand the need to be uncompromising with the truth and the dangers of diluting it. But …
 
Your heart is in the right place I think. As I get older I am getting closer to your view anyway.
 
No, it doesn’t. One who follows the Magisterium can speak of Catholics who openly dissent from the Magisterium, and there is no hypocrisy in that.

You conflate sinlessness with truthfulness.

One, for example, may commit a sin against the 6th commandment; committing a sin is not the same as rejecting the truth of the commandment. Weakness in sexual matters is not the same as rejection of any truth that, for example, fornication is wrong. Not all who fornicate deny that it is wrong; but some (actually, in this day an age, most) deny that it is wrong, whether or not they are fornicating. And if a popular magazine supports living together, one who follows the Magisterium may say that the editor of the magazine is picking and choosing what moral laws they accept; and at the same time, the one following the Magisterium may commit the sin.

The editor is not going to go to confession. The one following the Magisterium who sins is going to go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top