Talk:Cafeteria Catholic

Article POV issues?
I think it can be argued that some conservatives show just as much, if not more selectiveness about which moral teachings they will follow as do liberals. JesseG 18:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Let me give you a perfect example. US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who wears his Catholicism on his sleeve, said that any judge who does not believe in capital punishment should resign from the bench, even though John Paul II denounced it in Evangelium Vitae (see http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2022 for Scalia's remarks). Pat Buchanan, in support of Scalia, said "it is the Holy Father and the bishops who are outside the Catholic mainstream, and at odds with Scripture, tradition and natural law" -- see http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26388 ) Why aren't conservatives damning Buchanan for saying, in as many words, that the Pope and the bishops are wrong? Jhobson1 16:33, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Which? A true Catholic must be a supporter of the Church teachings. These include her modern-day support of worker rights and social justice issues, related to the poor and oppressed, and restraint on capitalism AND also, her teachings on family life and sexual issues. And her teachings on respect for the environment

Both party, have issues that are absolutely opposed to part of the Church's teachings, so therefore, a true Catholic is considered a moderate in both parties. Many, many Catholics including religious orders have a devotion to helping the needy, therefore, they vote Democrat but try to choose the candidates that are least likely to support anti-Catholic teachings.

Many, many Catholics who want to see an improvement in how public schools treat sexual education or to see at least some limits on abortion vote Republican, but choose candidates that will also support minimum wage increases, and limits on the markets.

At the both left and right, there are people who believe that people who have "things" and money are people who will be civil. The increase in urban gangs is the result of the lame left wing idea that people stop being violent when they have more stuff. People stop being violent when they know people care--it comes only from direct human contact (not from people who get a paycheck from that contract). Neither a right-wing hedonist, NOR a rich left-wing elitist bothers to get to know the soul of people and what they can offer. A Catholic strives to be like neither.

An American who votes with liberals, i.e, Democrats, can be a good Catholic, likewise, a Republican voter.

The problem is that the word "liberal" is distorted in this country. "Liberal" means always listening the other point of view, and questioning whether you thought out all the possible results to a decision. The American constitution reflects liberalism. Pro-welfare, anti-capitalism, anti-racism, environmental causes can all be viewed liberally. On homosexual priests, gender issues, annulments, birth control-- the Church has many mixed voices.

During recent years, "liberal" has come to mean a conservative leftist. A person who by ideology must hate the true teachings of Christ because it is in direct opposition to social Marxism, which is the foundation of modern leftism. The ACLU (take a look at their founders), arguably the loudest voice, in the Democratic party, seeks to use Christian and Catholic ideals of humility and tolerance to eliminate all reminders of what Jesus wants for society--that is, forgiveness of each other's shortcomings and an understanding that any person, regardless of economic status, may have something in his person to offer another. Leftists" hate this. The rich leftist wants the government to take care of the poor, so he doesn't have to feel guilty about not wanting the poor in his neighborhood.  The poor leftist are intolerant and hateful to people who have more than them and think they have not just a right but an obligation to be unaccepting of all persons who are in a higher tax bracket.

If you think that social Marxism(ie leftism, ie American redefining the word liberalism) is even remotely compatable with being any kind of Christian, even a secular one, let alone a Catholic, then either you are gravely misinformed of one or both of these philosophies. Considering your lack of understanding that true Catholic voters are almost always centrists, I will assume that your use of "conservative" means that you are a leftist.

With regards to the topic at hand: "Cafeteria Catholics" is more than a person who has a gay partner or uses birth control, more than a woman who has had an abortion. They are people who don't even question the possibility that when the Church has a view that doesn't fit into their lifestyle then they don't have to question it. They are generally unaware of the full Church teachings, convinced that they have no obligation to learn more, yet like the benefit of sitting in a church with pretty windows or of having a wedding that doesn't offend Grandmom.

Honest thoughtful people don't join organizations that they don't agree with just to weaken them. They don't stay in organizations that they think are lame. And if one's going to criticize something, then should thoroughly and thoughtfully understand where the people are coming from. A leftist Cafeteria Catholic isn't even culturally Catholic, let alone catechistically one. They can be nothing other than "cafeteria" Catholics because they can't justify their core Marxist ideology of cultural relativism with Christ's teachings. You can't be a Catholic if you think all cultures and religions have equal access to the Truth. True Christians believe that we must strive for tolerance and charity of all individuals, not tolerance and charities of all ways of living. Up until quite recently America constantly corrected itself and improved equality by thinking this way. Now you leftist are destroying the most liberal country on the planet, and to do so you must first destroy its christological underpinnings, so that nothing is left but materialism and relativism.

This may be considered off topic, but are there cafeteria Protestants, particurarly Episcopalians, since Episcopalians seem to believe in a spectrum of belief and adherence to moral law (check the Wikipedia article). Or is this "cafeterianism" just restricted to Roman Catholics?

Shouldn't this be a wiktionary entry? (as opposed to an encyclopedia article. gdavies 04:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)