Justifying Cafeteria Catholics

[HisChildForever]

[b]Cafeteria Catholics[/b]

[i]Father Jack Rathschmidt[/i]

ON VACATION LAST SUMMER, I quietly joined a small country parish for Sunday Eucharist. Relieved at not having to preside at two or three liturgies, I settled among the worshipers, looking forward to listening, singing, and praying. Trying not to look directly at the priest for fear he would think I was staring, I concentrated on being among God's people, not leading them.

Everything went fine for a while. The music was delightful, the lectors read well, and the priest seemed comfortable in his role. [b]Then he began to preach about "cafeteria Catholics," people who pick and choose what and how they will believe—as they do in cafeteria lines. He suggested real Catholics take it all. They listen to the pope and bishops with the same reverence children offer their parents and accept Rome's authority as binding in matters great and small.

I listened closely for a while, then my mind and spirit began to drift. Hasn't the church consistently encouraged Catholics to recognize a hierarchy of truths, challenging us to differentiate between foundational gospel values like service among the poor from a less important teaching like the existence of limbo? [u]By this time, it was getting hot in that little church, and I wanted to be back in my boat fishing.[/u][/b]

But the priest wouldn't quit. I kept telling myself that he was having a bad day. All of us do. Smiling I began to think about the times I was preaching and simply couldn't find a way to end, even though I tried several times. Then, he said it again: "Cafeteria Catholics, unless they are willing to submit to church authority blindly, have no place in the church." Using my 12-step spirituality, I repeated a familiar axiom to myself: take what you like and leave the rest.

Oh my God, I thought, he's talking about me.Taking what I like and leaving the rest makes me a cafeteria Catholic. Unable to listen any longer, especially to what sounded like an angry and harsh tone, I was doing exactly what he was railing against: picking and choosing what I liked and shutting out the rest. But doesn't everyone do this, I asked myself? Don't Catholics everywhere have a right to resist abuse in all forms, even when it comes from the pulpit? Shouldn't people stop listening to me when I get pompous and judgmental as a presider or a preacher?

Without realizing it, I was getting defensive, wondering whether I should introduce myself after Mass and ask the presider whether I had heard him right, offering him an opportunity to go beyond what I thought he said. Thank God, I came to my senses. [b]You're on vacation, I told myself. Calm down, pray, and do what Catholics everywhere do with increasing regularity: listen politely, and go home. Still, as I stepped into my little boat and rowed myself onto the lake where I hoped to catch a giant bass, the need to defend cafeteria Catholics wouldn't go away.[/b]

Now I know that cafeterias get very little respect among sophisticated gourmets. Although they sometimes eat in them because they're rushed, they don't want to dignify them by calling them restaurants. One step up from fast-food joints, cafeterias usually have a long line of vegetables, meats, and salads—none of which seem very appealing. Cafeterias do have a dark side, I have to admit.

[b]At the same time, although often very big and poorly decorated, cafeterias welcome everyone, charge very little for their food, and provide a safe place for people to rest and conversation. The poor, the elderly, the homeless, even large families with small children, all know they can gather there without fear of being evicted. Sounds a lot like many good parishes I know![/b]

Perhaps even more important, it seems to me that the church has been like a cafeteria for 2,000 years. Haven't we always at our best, appreciated our differences without expecting everyone to be the same? We honor Eastern Rite Catholics, whose liturgy and language are so different from ours, and Japanese Catholics, who enter their churches shoeless. We welcome peoples of every culture, race, and political affiliation, and we are even beginning to understand that the sacred stories of the poor are a privileged source of hope and help us understand the Christ who "had no place to lay his head."

We also reverence bishops who tell us that capital punishment is always unjust and a pope who leaves open the door to taking another's life only in very extraordinary circumstances. We acknowledge that some people like me are called to follow the poor Christ as Franciscans, and others are supposed to build Benedictine monasteries. In other words, we implicitly admit that our goal is not uniformity of belief and practice but unity of faith.

At our best, we stand in awe at the doors of our churches contemplating our incredible diversity, never expecting to understand or fully appreciate all the people with whom we gather. And because we recognize the complexity of all our lives, [b]we are grateful to share faith and worship with one another despite the realization that we will have differences of opinions about many significant religious matters. More important, our collective humanity never tries to reduce the mystery of our shared faith to rigid formulas but celebrates the wonder of our unity in the midst of our differences.[/b]

[b]Even a cursory glance through history reminds us that Catholics have always had a cafeteria mentality. We have been fighting like cats and dogs about our differences for centuries, from the meaning of the Incarnation to women's ordination and how Christ is present in the Eucharist.[/b]

Despite these sometimes violent struggles about which we often fail to reach full understanding or agreement, we continue to call one another, brother and sister, Catholics.

Last year I was giving a talk at a religious education conference and learned this lesson first hand. Hoping to help catechists understand and appreciate the power and value of our sacred symbols, I asked people what they thought the important gestures of our eucharistic celebration were. One woman eagerly waved her hand. Before I could even recognize her, she blurted out: "When the priest raises the host for our adoration." "Thanks," I said, "A good answer. Someone else?" "When we open our hands to receive the host," another participant suggested. "Right," I said, "anyone else?" hoping that someone would mention the fractioning or breaking of the bread, a gesture that helps us remember that Christ broke his life for us as food and asks us to do the same for one another.

[b]Instead of an answer, someone almost shouted a question. "Do you believe in transubstantiation?" Hesitating for a moment, I responded, "That's a very difficult question. Perhaps we could talk about it after the workshop."

The response was swift. The Catechism believes in transubstantiation. I knew I was trapped. How could I explain, without upsetting the questioner even more, that Catholics believe in the Real Presence of Christ and that transubstantiation is the way theologians have often explained the Real Presence. Flustered now, I suggested again that we needed to speak about the question after the conference.[/b]

Then a teenager rescued me. "I'm lost" she said. "I'm not sure it's important, but what's transubstantiation?" Everyone laughed except the person who wanted me to believe in transubstantiation. The young girl's question reminded everyone that we really are diverse. Not only did she not know what transubstantiation was, our further conversation demonstrated that she really didn't care.

"I know we receive Jesus when we celebrate the Eucharist," she said, "and as long as the children preparing for First Communion know that, I'm happy." Somehow she knew that whether she explained Christ's presence using the notion of transubstantiation or some other explanation, the key to belief was not theological insight but acceptance of the mystery of Christ's presence.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church also helps us learn about the power and value of diversity in the church. While reminding us of our sometimes violent history (#817), it challenges us to delve more deeply into the mystery of faith, acknowledging the simple sanity of proclaiming our unity without demanding uniformity (#819). Nowhere is this clearer than when the catechism reminds us that "the body's unity does not do away with the diversity of its members; `In the building up of Christ's body there is engaged a diversity of members and functions. There is only one spirit who, according to his own richness and the needs of the ministries, gives different gifts for the welfare of the whole church'" (#791).

In other words, all of us have different gifts that are intended to work together for the good of all. It is not necessary that we compare gifts or have them all to be good Catholics. Neither is it essential that we have absolute agreement about everything the church teaches. While it is undeniable that we need to agree in faith about foundational teachings like the Incarnation, the Trinity, and our shared commitment to justice, there is enormous room for dialogue about how Christ is truly God and human, how God is three persons but only one God, and how best to work for justice. In the end, whenever we forget that we are trying to help people understand, appreciate, and believe in the mystery of God's presence within and among us, we not only add to an unhealthy division in the church, we also risk reducing God to our own constructs. When we do that, we can easily fall into idolatry.

Many adult cafeteria Catholics not only tolerate diversity in the church, they celebrate it. They choose a variety of paths to personal holiness, are excited by the insights of other religious traditions; they not only appreciate the development of doctrine through the centuries, they expect it to continue. [b]Grounded in compassion and never forgetting where they come from, cafeteria Catholics honor other Catholics who can't stand music at Mass, esteem their neighbors who serve on parish councils, and listen politely to poorly crafted homilies because they respect the office of their priests if not their speaking ability. They try never to judge others who think differently from them and listen carefully to all with the expectation that there is much to learn about what it means to be Catholic now and in the future. And together with those with whom they often disagree, they volunteer in soup kitchens and homeless shelters week after week.[/b]

[b]While cafeteria Catholics have received very bad press in recent years, often being condemned for actions they never even contemplated, they continue—struggling to understand and appreciate the most important and foundational teachings of the church. My experience tells me they are a community of searchers who are proud to call themselves Catholic while freely admitting they are sifting through the vast array of church teaching, trying to discern what most helps them on their own faith journeys. Humbled by their honesty and empowered by their passion, I am proud to join them in the search.[/b]

[i]Father Jack Rathschmidt, O.F.M.Cap., is chaplain at the College of New Rochelle and author, with Gaynell Cronin, of Rituals for Home and Parish (Paulist, 1996). [/i]

Link: [url="http://uscatholic.claretians.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5810&news_iv_ctrl=1282&abbr=usc_"]http://uscatholic.claretians.org/site/News...2&abbr=usc_[/url]




The last part I emphasized I found a bit disturbing. In my opinion that last paragraph relates to Catholics who are studying the faith for a better understanding, not Catholics who select which parts of doctrine to follow while discarding other teachings that do not fit with their personal opinion. Furthermore, the second to last paragraph makes it sound like Catholics who practice the faith 100% are not as charitable or as pleasant to be around. I am also confused about that bit on transubstantiation and why A PRIEST (the author) seemed unable to explain it.

>> Even a cursory glance through history reminds us that Catholics have always had a cafeteria mentality. We have been fighting like cats and dogs about our differences for centuries, from the meaning of the Incarnation to women's ordination and how Christ is present in the Eucharist. <<

Ridiculous.

Edited February 26, 2009 by HisChildForever

[mcts]

CATHOLICS don't have a cafeteria mentality. PROTESTANTS do. I'm pretty sure that with as many protestant denominations as there are now, if they don't agree with the Catholic church for some reason or another, there is a protestant church that "fits" what you think is right.

unfortunately, this priest sounds kind of like my new priest

[CatherineM]

It didn't seem so much like he couldn't explain transubstantiation, it seemed like he said he didn't believe in it.

I agree with you. I don't think that Cafeteria Catholics are trying to decide anything. I think most have their minds made up.

[KnightofChrist]

Translation in one word, Heresy.

[Jesus_lol]

i kinda liked it

i would hazard to guess that hardcore catholics are a little more unpleasant to cafeteria catholics than the other way around. and its not entirely picking the easy path, as cafeteria catholics would receive the same general disdain/prejudice from the population as a hardcore would, and they are not exactly ok with the hardcore catholics either.

just because you disagree with one of the medical systems policies doesnt mean you cant be a doctor or receive treatment

[Maximilianus]

What's the point in being Catholic if your not going to be hard core? Anthing less than 100% leads to relativism, heresy and a bunch of other ills.

[TotusTuusMaria]

What a very confused man.

[TotusTuusMaria]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' post='1791770' date='Feb 26 2009, 03:19 AM']i kinda liked it

i would hazard to guess that hardcore catholics are a little more unpleasant to cafeteria catholics than the other way around. and its not entirely picking the easy path, as cafeteria catholics would receive the same general disdain/prejudice from the population as a hardcore would, and they are not exactly ok with the hardcore catholics either.

just because you disagree with one of the medical systems policies doesnt mean you cant be a doctor or receive treatment[/quote]

I don't know....

I was talking to a friend who was trying to defend himself as being a cafeteria catholic and he referred to anyone who accepted the things he did not as a bigot. I don't think "cafeteria catholics" can always be said to be pleasant people who "deal" with often judgemental "hardcore Catholics." And "Cafeteria Catholics" usually do not receive the same "disdain and prejudice" from the population. Look at Pelosi or Kennedy. Cafeteria Catholics. Accepted by the world because they "don't follow the silly, bigoted church."

Here is what John Paul II had to say about it,

"It is sometimes reported that a large number of Catholics today do not adhere to the teaching of the Catholic Church on a number of questions, notably sexual and conjugal morality, divorce and remarriage. Some are reported as not accepting the clear position on abortion. It has to be noted that there is a tendency on the part of some Catholics to be selective in their adherence to the Church's moral teaching.[b] 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 of the Bishops in the United States and elsewhere." [/b]

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1791761' date='Feb 26 2009, 12:57 AM']I agree with you. I don't think that Cafeteria Catholics are trying to decide anything. I think most have their minds made up.[/quote]

Yes, the priest was making it sound like these individuals are on a quest for Truth - but later seemed to clarify by using words like "their own" and "personal faith." I mean, we all have [b]personal[/b] faith (you may prefer Matthew whereas I enjoy John) but I think he meant [b]personal[/b] as in "what 'works' best for the individual."

[quote name='Jesus_lol' post='1791770' date='Feb 26 2009, 01:19 AM']i kinda liked it

i would hazard to guess that hardcore catholics are a little more unpleasant to cafeteria catholics than the other way around. and its not entirely picking the easy path, as cafeteria catholics would receive the same general disdain/prejudice from the population as a hardcore would, and they are not exactly ok with the hardcore catholics either.

just because you disagree with one of the medical systems policies doesnt mean you cant be a doctor or receive treatment[/quote]

To call oneself Catholic is to acknowledge that one believes Catholic teachings, no exceptions. To firmly call oneself a "Cafeteria Catholic" is pointless, especially since one of the main teachings of the Church is that She is infallible. Can you [i]imagine[/i] someone saying "I love the Church, but I disagree with what the Church teaches on homosexuality." How can one believe the Church infallible while also believing that She is wrong on a teaching?

If I was a vegetarian who ate chicken, I would no longer be a vegetarian.

[bonkers]

And like any good cafetaria, the church has always been willing to accept their moneys.

[bonkers]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1791797' date='Feb 26 2009, 07:43 AM']Yes, the priest was making it sound like these individuals are on a quest for Truth - but later seemed to clarify by using words like "their own" and "personal faith." I mean, we all have [b]personal[/b] faith (you may prefer Matthew whereas I enjoy John) but I think he meant [b]personal[/b] as in "what 'works' best for the individual."



To call oneself Catholic is to acknowledge that one believes Catholic teachings, no exceptions. To firmly call oneself a "Cafeteria Catholic" is pointless, especially since one of the main teachings of the Church is that She is infallible. Can you [i]imagine[/i] someone saying "I love the Church, but I disagree with what the Church teaches on homosexuality." How can one believe the Church infallible while also believing that She is wrong on a teaching?

If I was a vegetarian who ate chicken, I would no longer be a vegetarian.[/quote]

I guess people are seeking some sort of comfort, and Catholicism gives them that. They may also be seeking moral direction in their lives - but not wanting to compromise their individuality by giving into all moral demands of the church - particularly those they see as wrong or outdated. Some cafeteria catholics I'm sure make an outstanding contribution to your community, though it does seem odd they would be a member of an organisation which requires full obedience. I think most of them would be members for other reasons such as family tradition and ritual, and it seems the church has no problem accepting them into the pews. The priest who condemns the cafeteria catholic is probably the one without an audience to preach too.

[Ziggamafu]

Better to be in the parish than out of it, I always say. Pascal wrote that a person might "act into" a faith that they previously did not really believe. There is real grace to be enjoyed from sacred spaces and sacramentals. We are not Protestant; works and sacred objects and spaces really amount to something - and that "something" may produce the Spirit-inspired grace of total conversion. Better therefore to be a hard-headed Catholic who occasionally attends Mass and is proud of his faith than a hard-headed Protestant who goes to his own congregation's services with devotion. Both miss the mark but one stands a better chance.

Edited February 26, 2009 by Ziggamafu

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1791814' date='Feb 26 2009, 07:35 AM']Better to be in the parish than out of it, I always say. Pascal wrote that a person might "act into" a faith that they previously did not really believe. There is real grace to be enjoyed from sacred spaces and sacramentals. We are not Protestant; works and sacred objects and spaces really amount to something - and that "something" may produce the Spirit-inspired grace of total conversion. Better therefore to be a hard-headed Catholic who occasionally attends Mass and is proud of his faith than a hard-headed Protestant who goes to his own congregation's services with devotion. Both miss the mark but one stands a better chance.[/quote]
Accidental Catholics.

This thread reminds me of one of the cafepress bumpter stickers...

"CATHOLIC
(because anything less is simply Episcopalian)"

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1791750' date='Feb 26 2009, 01:25 AM'][b]Cafeteria Catholics[/b]

[i]Father Jack Rathschmidt[/i]

Then a teenager rescued me. "I'm lost" she said. "I'm not sure it's important, but what's transubstantiation?" Everyone laughed except the person who wanted me to believe in transubstantiation. The young girl's question reminded everyone that we really are diverse. Not only did she not know what transubstantiation was, our further conversation demonstrated that she really didn't care.

"I know we receive Jesus when we celebrate the Eucharist," she said, "and as long as the children preparing for First Communion know that, I'm happy." Somehow she knew that whether she explained Christ's presence using the notion of transubstantiation or some other explanation, the key to belief was not theological insight but acceptance of the mystery of Christ's presence.[/quote]

[Added clarification: Read at face value,] I don't interpret this as a denial of the doctrine of transubstantiation. For one, what we're seeing here is how the doctrine is intimidating to people who aren't interested in philosophy and theology, especially because it's almost always presented as this "high and mighty" theological concept to which only the really good and smart Catholics can attain. Or, the message is, "The Church has got it all figured out. You should just believe it." Of course, the basic idea is simple: "This is my body." It doesn't get any simpler than that.

Most likely, this teenage girl doesn't care what transubstantiation is because to her it's just an intellectual concept printed in a book or preached by an M.Div. (i.e. Master's in Divinity). It's apparent that the author sees it this way. The beauty of the doctrine is found in its mystery, in what it means about how God loves us and, therefore, how we are commanded to love one another. Teaching a doctrine on a solely intellectual level doesn't do it justice, and by the author's tone his approach to Catholic doctrine is primarily at the intellectual level. He doesn't see how all Catholic doctrines are interconnected. If you only eat what tastes good from the cafeteria line, your unhealthy diet will have undesirable consequences both physically and psychologically.

But as I was saying in another thread, the key to evangelizing a post-modern person is using story and personal experience. Preaching doctrine from a book doesn't work because, like that teenage girl, they don't care about those things. It's distant and impersonal. However, stories about real people, the saints and ourselves, are personal and that's where people will open to the truth enough for Christ to open their eyes, and see with eyes of faith. As for blind faith... that's an oxymoron if there ever was one.

Edited February 26, 2009 by LouisvilleFan

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1791814' date='Feb 26 2009, 09:35 AM']Better to be in the parish than out of it, I always say. Pascal wrote that a person might "act into" a faith that they previously did not really believe. There is real grace to be enjoyed from sacred spaces and sacramentals. We are not Protestant; works and sacred objects and spaces really amount to something - and that "something" may produce the Spirit-inspired grace of total conversion. Better therefore to be a hard-headed Catholic who occasionally attends Mass and is proud of his faith than a hard-headed Protestant who goes to his own congregation's services with devotion. Both miss the mark but one stands a better chance.[/quote]
I'll take a faithful protestant over a faithless Catholic anyday.