Serious Catholics

[iamrefreshed]

I’ve seen those here who take exception to this term. Especially regarding CAF’s voting guide for serious catholics.

They want to know what serious catholics are. Well, it’s pretty simple. It’s those catholics who believe in everything taught by our church. Not the picker’s and chooser’s.

What’s so hard to understand about that?

If you contracept, you are a cafeteria catholic.
If you support abortion, you are a cafeteria catholic.
If you support same sex marriage, you are a cafeteria catholic.
And so on, and so on.

Do ‘serious catholics’ sin? Of course they do. They just don’t try and change the definition of sin.

Do you believe that if you do not follow church teachings, that you are still catholic?

 

[MarieVeronica]

Thank you very much for your candor. This takes courage. I too, will weigh in… as a Serious Catholic. God bless.

 

[bjmiller100753]

Do you believe that if you do not follow church teachings, that you are still catholic?

I too have asked this question both in threads I’ve started and participated in. Unfortunately one of the threads I started about this very topic was moved to the Back Fence if you can believe that?? I hope that yours is allowed to remain here where it will be seen by many more than viewed mine.

This coming Saturday I will be going to confession for the first time in well over 35+ years. On Sunday I will be receiving the Eucharist for the first time in decades as well. I still struggle with those teachings that contributed to my leaving the Church in the first place but I have also come to realize, “If we find ourselves disagreeing as Catholics with the Catholic teaching of our Church on a serious matter, it’s probably not the Church that’s wrong. The problem is much more likely with us.” I am moving forward knowing that I’ve been wrong for over 2/3 of my life. I thank God he has given me back the faith that I so conveniently discarded many years ago. And to answer your original question, “Catholic” is a word that has real meaning. We don’t control or invent that meaning as individuals. We inherit it from the Gospel and the experience of the Church over the centuries. We can choose to be something else, but if we choose to call ourselves Catholic, than that word has consequences for what we believe and how we act. We can’t truthfully claim to be Catholic and then act like we’re not." While I never claimed to be Catholic while I was gone, I knew if I truly wanted to come back, I had to submit myself to the will of God.

The quotes above are from Archbishop Chaput of Denver.

 

[fix]

I have been involved in many of these very threads. Just to keep it going I would say it is probably incorrect to say a Catholic is not a Catholic. One may be a Catholic and a schismatic, or excommunicated, or heretic, or simply heterodox, and still be Catholic.

I offer this:

The Church Fathers taught that the faithful are absolutely bound to obey all the teachings of the Roman Pontiff. St. Irenaeus of Lyons, for example, stated about the Roman Church: "With this Church on account of its special eminence, every other Church must agree."21 Pope St. Leo the Great stated that "the care of the universal Church would converge in the See of Peter, and nothing should ever be at odds with this head."22

The Doctors of the Church also taught the same absolute obedience to the Pope during the Middle Ages. St. Thomas Aquinas stated that if a dispute arises between a theologian and the teaching authority of the Church, then, "we must abide rather by the Pope’s judgment than by the opinion of any of the theologians, however well versed he may be in Divine Scripture."23 When St. Teresa of Avila described the faithful and holy soul, she pointed out: "All the revelations it could imagine-even if it were to see the heavens open-wouldn’t move it one bit from what the Church holds."24 She said about a doubt or “thought” against a Church teaching, even a “small truth” of the Church: "just to pause over this thought is already very wrong."25

It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the Magisterium is totally compatible with being a “good Catholic” and poses no obstacle to the reception of the sacraments. This is a grave error that challenges the teaching office of the bishops of the United States and elsewhere.38 John Paul II

 

[stayathomemommy]

This has always been hard for me. I hate judge others because that is not for us to do so try not to label people, we don’t know the state of their souls even if we think we have a pretty good idea. It bothers me when my group of friends is talking about a catholic subject and i walk up and say, “oh I didnt know everyone was catholic?” and they say, “Oh, she is a good catholic and actually goes to church” they think this is funny since they all say they are catholic but for various reasons (time, little children, ect) dont ever go to church. its hard but through example and encouragement i hope they will see that they can make the time and if i can attend church with my 4 little ones they can make it with their one child. Someday it will click and maybe they wont have far to go to come back into full communion with the church.

 

[vern_humphrey]

We are not called upon to judge in the perjorative sense.

We are, however, called upon to live by, uphold and defend Catholic doctrine and morality – and that’s what this site is all about. And we can and should do that vigorously.

 

[puzzleannie]

at times I am a frivolous Catholic, at other times a serious Catholic, or a light-hearted Catholic, or an earnest Catholic, or one who tries to find the humor in every situation to avoid going nuts. don’t know of any other attitude will help me survive working with and for the Church today.

 

[Sina]

Do you believe that if you do not follow church teachings, that you are still catholic?

Depends I guess. Some don’t follow certain teachings because of the following reasons:

• poorly Catchesized.
• Ignorant (maybe the same as above)
• in denial
• Chose not to
  -Vehemently opposed
• are a poor sinner

I think I am a poor sinner.

I understand the frustration of the “Serious Catholics” when they encounter the picking and chosing of church doctrine by cafeteria Catholics, but isn’t the best thing to pray for them? I bet some of you were cafeteria Catholics at some point in your life…

Who here is a Cafeteria Catholic has-been?!?!

 

[iamrefreshed]

Who here is a Cafeteria Catholic has-been?!?!

Me…Big Time!!!

I hated who I was several years ago. I’m cradle catholic but you would have hardly known it.

My final step was to eliminate the contracepting a few years ago. I’m terrified of having another child at my age but, I cannot, in good conscience, continue to contracept.

I hope others on that journey can find the peace I have found.

 

[Chancellare]

There are at least 2 kinds of Catholics who disagree with Church teachings:

1. Those who know deep in their heart but disagree because of inconvenience.
   2… Those who don’t know any better.
   The only lasting way out is to pray for guidance from the Holy Spirit.

 

[setter]

Read the gospels and Jesus makes it very, very clear, repeatidly, that to be a serious Catholic, i.e., a faithful disciple and good servant, demands a daily dying to self and rising to a life that is possible only with God’s supernatural help. How many Catholics do we see walking each day in the reality of this call to faithful discipleship and obedience to the gospel? It is good and sobering (and offensive to some) to remember how Jesus answered the one who questioned him “Will many be saved?”.

 

[SoCalRC]

Read the gospels and Jesus makes it very, very clear, repeatidly, that to be a serious Catholic, i.e., a faithful disciple and good servant, demands a daily dying to self and rising to a life that is possible only with God’s supernatural help. How many Catholics do we see walking each day in the reality of this call to faithful discipleship and obedience to the gospel? It is good and sobering (and offensive to some) to remember how Jesus answered the one who questioned him “Will many be saved?”.

An excellent point. If we are not first and foremost good Christians, the rest is moot. And Christ made it clear, no matter how ‘good’ we think we are, we most likely have a long way to go.

I would freely admit that the term “serious Catholic” makes me uncomfortable. It is probably partly generational. Self congratulation is something I normally associate with non-Catholic Christian denominations. I can actually picture myself using the phrase and getting wrapped on the knuckles by Sister Mary S, perhaps followed by a pointed question on rather or not I thought I was a TV Evangelist, or if I thought God had forgotten one or two particular transgressions in my recent past…

Choosing to be a combat medic because of my faith was a pretty big step for me during Vietman, but I honestly don’t recall thinking that I was being an especially good Catholic. There were always plenty of examples for me to look up to. Compared to say, committing one’s entire life to providing care for the poorest people in India or getting hacked to death taking the Gospel to the Congo, not carrying a gun or shooting at people didn’t seem like that much to give up.

I am highly skeptical of the self described “Voters Guide for Serious Catholics” primarily because of what I see here. When you have questions on rather or not the guide is “infallible”, or posters quoting the guide as if it is official Church doctrine, then it seems reasonable to ask if the material is a hindrance to what many people here have indicated is important - namely, followiing Church teachings.

And, perhaps it is again generational, but it strikes me as odd to have anything profess to be Catholic, let alone ‘seriously Catholic’, that does not include a single teaching from the Gospels as being critically important.

 

[Chancellare]

This has always been hard for me. I hate judge others because that is not for us to do so try not to label people, we don’t know the state of their souls even if we think we have a pretty good idea. It bothers me when my group of friends is talking about a catholic subject and i walk up and say, “oh I didnt know everyone was catholic?” and they say, “Oh, she is a good catholic and actually goes to church” they think this is funny since they all say they are catholic but for various reasons (time, little children, ect) dont ever go to church. its hard but through example and encouragement i hope they will see that they can make the time and if i can attend church with my 4 little ones they can make it with their one child. Someday it will click and maybe they wont have far to go to come back into full communion with the church.

It’s true in many places. Inconvenience makes a bad Catholic among us.

 

[outfctrl]

I was brought up Catholic and I will die Catholic. Period. It doesnt matter what happens or what you support. Catholic is who you are in my book.

Once Baptized, that’s it. You try to switch religions, but you are still Catholic, no matter what you tell people.

Take my kids for example. After my divorce, my ex got remarried by a civil court (we were married in the Catholic Church) and went to the presbyterian church with my kids. Then they went to an Episcopal School, then they went to a Christian School.

I always told them when they came over, you are Catholic and you will always be Catholic.

Now they are all in a Catholic High School. THANK GOD.

What was funny, was my 14 year old was asked to say the Hail Mary the first day of class…he couldnt do it. Now, after a few semesters, he can say most all the prayers.

It just killed me, her dragging my kids all over the place and confusing them.

 

[drafdog]

I’m not a “serious” Catholic. I’m a joyful Catholic. There is too much comedy and humor in the world to be serious.
I make a point of laughing at myself at least once a day. As a result I have little in the way of signs of aging although I number my years at over three score.

Matthew

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

I’ve seen those here who take exception to this term. Especially regarding CAF’s voting guide for serious catholics.

They want to know what serious catholics are. Well, it’s pretty simple. It’s those catholics who believe in everything taught by our church. Not the picker’s and chooser’s.

What’s so hard to understand about that?

If you contracept, you are a cafeteria catholic.
If you support abortion, you are a cafeteria catholic.
If you support same sex marriage, you are a cafeteria catholic.
And so on, and so on.

Do ‘serious catholics’ sin? Of course they do. They just don’t try and change the definition of sin.

Do you believe that if you do not follow church teachings, that you are still catholic?

Personally, I do not think the terms “serious” or “cafeteria” do anything else but divide at arbitrary points. They are used with a uncharitable approach that splits us on what we disagree on and infer that is all it can be. If you take those terms away, we as Catholics are much closer than we give ourselves to be. Division is so much easier to create than unity.

 

[He_Man]

Personally, I do not think the terms “serious” or “cafeteria” do anything else but divide at arbitrary points. They are used with a uncharitable approach that splits us on what we disagree on and infer that is all it can be. If you take those terms away, we as Catholics are much closer than we give ourselves to be. Division is so much easier to create than unity.

Division is caused when you leave the Church, or refute her teachings. Not when you use certain terms.

People who rebel against a certain institution divide themselves. Do not put the blame on people who call these things what they are.

 

[Newbie2]

A couple of questions:

1. Where do we place Catholics who struggle with an issue, i.e. ABC. Let’s say they are trying hard to understand the reason for the Church’s position, maybe have a spouse who doesn’t have any problems using it, and goes and confesses it regularly…in other words, is trying their best to understand and comply, but still struggles with it. Where do we place them on the “Serious” scale?
2. How closely does one’s Seriousness of the faith correlate with adherence to Church rules and laws. In other words, does greater adherence to Church doctrine=more “Serious-ness”?

I ask this because how “Serious” a Catholic is about his or her faith is up for discussion i.e. what exactly does Serious mean?

So, could serious mean or imply “Pharisee-like”, in some sense?

1. Where does Spirituality come in the assessment of degree of seriousness?

 

[iamrefreshed]

Personally, I do not think the terms “serious” or “cafeteria” do anything else but divide at arbitrary points. They are used with a uncharitable approach that splits us on what we disagree on and infer that is all it can be. If you take those terms away, we as Catholics are much closer than we give ourselves to be. Division is so much easier to create than unity.

I don’t think, for the most part, the terms are used uncharitably, but if one was opposing a church teaching, I could understand how it could be taken that way.

When you say ‘what we disagree on’, what do you mean? Are you talking latin rite? If so, there is only one teaching and one authority.

No one likes to be told they are disobedient to a teaching in which they claim obedience.

 

[SoCalRC]

So, could serious mean or imply “Pharisee-like”, in some sense?

I’m not sure what other sense you could take it. We’ve heard “Pharisee” used as an example by Jesus so often that we have largely forgotten what the word meant at the time Jesus used it. Here is just a snippet from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Such was the state of things in the third century when the newly introduced Hellenism threatened Judaism with destruction. The more zealous among the Jews drew apart calling themselves Chasidim or “pious ones”, i.e., they dedicated themselves to the realization of the ideas inculcated by Esdras, the holy priest and doctor of the law. In the violent conditions incidental to the Machabean wars these “pious men”, sometimes called the Jewish Puritans, became a distinct class. They were called Pharisees, meaning those who separated themselves from the heathen, and from the heathenizing forces and tendencies which constantly invaded the precincts of Judaism (1 Maccabees 1:11; 2 Maccabees 4:14 sq.; cf. Josephus Antiq., XII, 5:1).

During these persecutions of Antiochus the Pharisees became the most rigid defenders of the Jewish religion and traditions. In this cause many suffered martyrdom (1 Maccabees 1:41 sq.), and so devoted were they to the prescriptions of the Law that on one occasion when attacked by the Syrians on the Sabbath they refused to defend themselves (1 Maccabees 2:42; ibid., 5:3 sq.).

They were ultra conservative Jews, focussed on utterly adhering to the laws of their faith. Jesus’ listeners would generally have thought of them as ultra devout and heros to their people. Samaria, on the other hand, was seen as an arch enemy to Judea, heathens set on destroying the faith (again, see the Catholic Encyclopedia for an introduction).

The Pharisees were also extremely xenophobic. Much of the friction with Jesus was seemingly over his message about welcoming the stranger. The Pharisees thought it was essential to seperate themselves and be distinctly identified as true jews.

So, if the definition of “serious Catholic” is strict adherence to Church law and the label itself is considered necessary, than the concept is at least somewhat “Pharisee-like” in a historical sense. But that does not nec. make it Pharisee-like in terms of Luke 18:9-14. That would depend on the individual, is meticulous adherence to particular Church teachings a source of pride and self importance, or just another step in reaching for Christ?

Your question on spirituality is a good one. It is seemingly at the core of that particular Gospel reading. Legal literalism does not do any good if one loses sight of, say, the Beatitudes, or proper perspective on one’s own true relationship to God.