On a light note, my friend (and the friends she brough with her from Ravelry) liked my navy story (it’s near the bottom of this post) that ended, “Hope is not a course of action!” So, they made a button out of it. Very nice, y’all. 
Now to the subject of the post title.
I don’t usually do this as often as I should, but here’s a post tonight that I loved, from gukkhser. And, aside from the very serious elements, I also loved her link to this bumpersticker. No, she isn’t supporting Obama (and neither am I!).
For those of you not familiar with the phrase, “cafeteria Catholic” refers to those Catholics who pick and choose which parts of Catholicism they feel like believing. “Well, I’m Catholic, but I don’t really listen when the pope talks about [fill in favorite sin or issue here].” Like Speaker Nancy Pelosi or Senator Joe Biden both insisting that they’re devout Catholics… even though they actively support the legalized murder of more than a million children a year in the U.S. alone through abortion. “Well, I’m Catholic, but I don’t believe in transubstantiation and I don’t think anyone else should, either.” “Well, I’m Catholic, but I live with my significant other, because the Church is just uptight about sex and doesn’t understand.”
(Note: this is not the issue of, “I have sins, doubts, and areas where I don’t understand why the Church says what it says. I’m not bragging about them, and I’m working and praying to correct/answer them.” We all have that. Cafeteria Catholicism is a more stubborn refusal to acknowledge the Church’s teachings, especially combined with an insistance that this is ok, it’s just “thinking Catholicism” to disagree with the pope or something like that… Incidentally, I consider myself a thinking Catholic, thank you very much, I just try to think with the mind of the Church, which is not what is generally meant by “thinking Catholic.”)
After Cardinal Josef Ratzinger was elected pope, the phrase, “The cafeteria is closed!” was an oft-repeated joyful cry in certain Catholic quarters. (There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth in quarters that like to think of themselves as “thinking Catholics”.)
I’ve read reports of various Catholics who support Obama on the “consistent life ethic” theory, which says that the other “life issues” weigh equally with abortion, so, for example, Obama’s opposition to the Iraq War, support for universal health care, and other issues outweighs his radically pro-abortion positions, including voting against requiring medical care for infants who survived an abortion. (And some do survive; see Gianna Jensen’s story, summarized here, with a link to her commercial on Sen. Obama’s record on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.) There was even a nun working for the Obama campaign, making phone calls and such, who justified her work there by the questionable logic of the “consistent life ethic.”
Except that even the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops managed to say (with relative clarity this time) that abortion holds a primary position among the life issues. Free health care and avoidance of war does you no good if you were one of the more than a million children per year in the U.S. murdered as a fetus.
Be Catholic, or don’t. But don’t pick a few nice, popular, or easy parts; ignore the rest; insist it doesn’t really matter; and call yourself a good Catholic. Frankly, it’s that kind of “religion” that un-churched people are usually mocking. If you love Jesus, why don’t you love your neighbor? The first love requires the second. If Catholicism doesn’t change you, you’re either already a saint (and they all seem to have been quite aware of their remaining faults, even when those around them weren’t) or you’re missing something. Religion should challenge us to be better than we are, to grow in holiness and maturity, not just affirm our current habits and thoughts. As the saying goes, “God loves you too much to leave you as you are right now.”
Religion can not do that if we intentionally ignore the hard parts.
Everyone wants to help the poor (ok, except for the extreme ends of Social Darwinism who think charity interferes with the natural elimination of substandard people from the gene pool). We disagree about how to do it. Sen. Biden, to judge from his tax returns, thinks government should do everything (average charity donation per year over the last eight years: just under $1000. Senators’ salary was about $160k over that time.). Sen. McCain’s wife’s job is giving away her family’s money and encouraging others, especially in Congress, to personally contribute to charity efforts. Both sides agree we should help the less fortunate, they just take vastly different routes to do it.
Everyone wants peace. Yes, especially members (or ex-members) of the military. The question, again, is, “How?” Will an immediate end to the war cause peace to break out or cause more conflicts with a stronger enemy later? Would U.S. isolationism, pacifism, and/or disarmament end world conflicts or embolden countries with agressive designs? We agree on the goal, but diverge widely on the means.
Abortion is harder. There is no universal consensus on any level of the issue. Is a fetus human or not? How do its/his/her rights compare to the mother’s? Is abortion murder or just another medical procedure to remove a parasitical growth? Is it a heinous mortal sin or should it be a pseudo-sacrament? Abortion requires that pro-lifers stand up and say unpopular things. It would be much easier to ignore it and work on what we can agree on, wouldn’t it? I mean, I’m not a fetus anymore, right?
To quote the cynical narrator at the end of Man for All Seasons, after Thomas More has been beheaded for his convictions, ”Whew! Thank goodness it wasn’t my neck!” The narrator’s last speech ends, the lights come up, and the audience is left with the uncomfortable feeling that we shouldn’t be too sure if we would behave like the saintly More, who wouldn’t compromise his convictions even if it meant he could be a good influence on the king otherwise, or the cynical narrator, who can’t even understand More’s faith, much less why he would lose his life for it.
Nobody would sacrifice his life for a selection from the cafeteria menu.
Thousands have sacrificed their lives for the fullness of Catholicism, even (or especially?) the hard parts.
So you are supporting McCain a man who wants to drive us to another war with either Iran, Russia or Venezuela? How is that a culture of life? Do adults not matter? Does life stop being worth fighting to protect once it is out of the womb? I support Obama because he is actually trying to lower the amount of abortions through education, parental involvement and societal pressure.
McCain is not going to overturn Roe vs. Wade. So it is a poor reason to support him on one topic only. McCain has killed people with his own actions. He dropped bombs indiscriminately on his fellow man. He is responsible for actual death. I just don’t understand when people think he cares at all about life when he has taken it. I know it was war, but he could have refused to go. He could have said “No I respect life I will not take anothers.”
I don’t think what we do is driving Iran, Russia, and Venezuela’s posturing and saber-rattling. They seem pretty intent on creating a war themselves.
Obama doesn’t want to lower the number of abortions. It is an absolute lie to say otherwise. He praised Planned Parenthood (the largest abortion provider in the country). He spoke against requiring doctors to provide medical care for babies that survived an abortion. He’s AGAINST parental involvement, not for it, as you claim. He wants to bring back the Freedom of Choice Amendment, which would remove ALL state laws that put any limits on abortion, including parental involvement, informed consent, age of the mother, and bans on taxpayer funding. His running mate, Sen. Biden, is famous for beating up judicial nominees for saying Roe vs. Wade was bad law or otherwise not being “pro-choice” enough. Obama wants to bring back U.S. funding of organizations that provide aboritons overseas.
How the heck do you think Obama has any interest at all in reducing the number of abortions?
McCain may not overturn Roe vs. Wade, but he will probably be appointing several Supreme Court justices. Since the “right” to abortion was manufactured and protected by that court, the SC justices are critical. The fact that I only talked about abortion in this post does not mean that’s the only reason I support McCain, as I’ve said in other posts.
And I guess you consider me just another “Murderer for McCain”? Because I was in the military, too. And I volunteered. And I served on an aircraft carrier involved in dropping bombs and causing “actual death”.
The fact that someone has served in the military, or on a police force, or even defended themselves with deadly force from an assault, does not mean that they don’t respect life.
But supporting someone who has the most pro-abortion record in the Senate certainly means you do NOT respect life.
First of all did not mean to offend you if I did. I was just pointing out what I thought was a disconnect that a lot of Pro lifers seem to have and that is the fact that military killing is okay when abortions are not.
I disagree with both of them. I hate war and I hate abortions. I want us to end war and to end abortions the only way that will actually work and that is through education and informing people about what they can do to not get pregnant.
Obama has talked about how he will work with educators and parents to get more involved in their children’s lives and to make sex education more practical. We won’t be able to stop people from having sex unless we completely change our media, movies, television and popular culture. But there is no reason why in America we have the highest rate of teenage pregnancy amongst industrialized countries at aroun 78 per 1000. (Denmark for instance has 14 per 100 and England has aroun 54 per thousand.)
I do not like death and I disagree with the use of military force. I think that taking another person’s life is wrong and damaging. I think that those that “serve” in the military have the option of not fighting. I think that if we would sit and talk with people we could come to agreements.
I think the most persuasive force in the world is economic ties. We have never gone to actual war with a country in which we are economically tied in an export/import style of relationship. I think we need to ship Ipods and peanut butter over seas not bullets.
Once again no offense meant. I have marched for sex education and making information available for teens and women to make better choices so that they do not become pregnant unless they want to. I think that is the more sensible way. There is no reason for people who do not plan a pregnancy to get pregnant in today’s world.
[...] Cafeteria Catholic for Obama By politicalhousewyf But don?t pick a few nice, popular, or easy parts; ignore the rest; insist it doesn?t really matter; and call yourself a good Catholic. Frankly, it?s that kind of ?religion? that un-churched people are usually mocking. … The Political Housewyf – http://politicalhousewyf.wordpress.com [...]
I think we’re going to continue to disagree on a few points, but no offense taken. Thank you for actually explaining your points; some commenters don’t.
I don’t think abortion is evil and wars are ok. Abortion is evil and so is war, although war, given the state of the world, is sometimes unavoidable, although it should always be the last option and should be conducted in as moral a manner as possible (we spend a lot of money making our weapons more accurate in an attempt to avoid killing innocents). I served most of my time in the Navy before 9/11, when we were enforcing the UN sanctions on Iraq in an attempt to get them to adhere to some semblance of international norms. It didn’t work. The U.S. is talking with many countries, but, sometimes, it doesn’t work. I wish it did. Seriously. My alumni magazine (Naval Academy) has too many obituaries in it when the diplomats fail.
And, yes, we have gone to war with a country we had economic ties to: England (the southern colonies had stronger economic ties and were more resistant to the idea of revolution, but they eventually agreed). Europe had plenty of economic ties leading into both World Wars, but still got into a war. Venezuela sells us a lot of oil, but Chavez still spouts off about how evil the U.S. is and invites Russian military exercises in his country. I think economic ties weigh into the equation, but they aren’t a cure-all. Or is it a chicken-egg thing? Do we trade mostly with countries we are friends with, or are we friends partly because our economies are tied?
The problem with teen pregnancy statistics is that they do not measure teen pregnancies, but teen births. Those teens who got abortions aren’t counted, so it’s hard to tell who really has the highest teen pregnancy rate, and Europe’s abortion rates are generally worse than ours (depending on the country). So, it’s difficult to tell which method of sex education is most effective at delaying sexual activity and preventing pregnancies.
The other place in your argument where I disagree with you is over contraception. Yes, you would think that contraception makes unwanted pregnancies less likely, but it doesn’t. Although contraception makes pregnancy for a given couple less likely, it also encourages many other couples to have sex who might’ve been deterred by fear of an unwanted pregnancy. So, the overall effect is that the number of unwanted pregnancies goes up, not down. Contraception has become increasingly available over the last fifty years, but unwanted pregnancies continued to rise, as do STD types and infection rates.
I agree that education is important, but I would focus on good life choices, the long-term damage of sexual promiscuity, and what goes on inside the womb during pregnancy (it isn’t a “blob”), not just contraceptives. The research that’s coming out about the bonding (chemical and psychological) effects of sex (and the consequences of repeatedly breaking those bonds to find a new partner) should show us why things as they are just isn’t working, and contraceptives can’t fix that.
Thank you very much for your post! It’s so nice to see someone out there who shares the same frustrations that I share about our fellow Catholics and the very important pro-life issue and articulate it as intelligently and as beautifully as you have. I was very happy to stumble upon your blog, and I look forward to reading more of the same. It’s very exciting to find good Catholics on the web who truly understand the faith and who do not compromise it. Thank you.
Consistent Life Ethic – it’s not just for breakfast any more.
Free bumperstickers too!
http://madprof.home.mindspring.com/ethic.html
-Jean Poole
in the heart of Orthodixie-
Hi, thanks for linking to me… and thank you very very much for this post.
Not to be nosy, but may I ask how you happened to find my blog? Are you from the 4real forum, by any chance?
[...] Sue…stef on *Only* Ignorancestef on *Only* Ignorancerichard on Text TwirlCafeteria Catholic f… on CREDO/I BelieveI Believe « … on CREDO/I Believemom on AWWWWW!!!Bookmarks [...]
Hi, Gukkhser,
I found you on the WordPress tag surfer; I tagged something about Humanae Vitae, and so had you, so one of your posts came up at the top of the page. I liked your blog, so I put it on my blog surfer list, and I check in from time to time. (and thanks for the pingback, too; I loved the latest post.)