Cafeteria Catholicism or Loyalist Dissent?

The name "cafeteria catholic" is commonly thrown, by staunch Vatican party-member Catholics, at those of us who remain united with the Roman Catholic Church, but do not doctrinally follow each and every pronouncement of the Magisterium. The adjective "cafeteria" is a belittling and symbolically violent word which tries to trivialize the faith of Catholics, such as myself, who break with the Magisterium on some doctrinal issues. 

"Cafeteria catholicism" implies that the faith and intellectualism of dissenting Catholics is based upon the crass notion of consumerism. Our faith is implied to be one where we shop for what happens to tempt our palate at the moment. In the cafeteria, if we do not like a food (for any whimsical reason) we move on and choose some other food that appears more appealing. The implication is that those of us who dissent from the Vatican party-line are just as arbitrary and capricious in our religion and faith as in the cafeteria searching for something to eat. When a doctrine that the Magisterium has proclaimed does not suit our desire, we simply move on to something else, choosing another notion that better suits our appetite.

The charge of "cafeteria catholicism" glosses over the reality that many of those of us who break with the Magisterium do not do so wantonly or blindly, but that we have very firm reasons from within the tradition. In other words, those of us who consider ourselves loyal dissidents, often dissent precisely for the sake of the tradition. The tradition (auto)deconstructs itself and pushes beyond the limits it has set for itself.

Jacques Derrida insisted that deconstruction is always auto-deconstruction. In other words, deconstruction is an internal process that works from within the discourse under analysis, not an external violence that bastardizes the text. It is the subject/object's own movement which is the process of deconstruction. 

Let me provide a lucent example. In the early centuries of Christian history, the value of sexuality was highly suspect and virulently denounced by giants of the Church. St. Augustine developed the notion, in his theology, that human beings are born into sin, because we are born from a sex act. The sex act is a necessary sin for the propagation of the human race. Pope Gregory the Great proclaimed that the pleasure derived from sexual acts was itself inherently sinful, assenting with the Augustinian theology, and citing as his proof Psalm 51:5, "Behold I was conceived in sins, and in delights my mother bore me." Pope Gregory commanded husbands or wives who had engaged in lawful, marital sexual relations to "abstain (from entering the church at once)."

With the coming of Vatican II, the Roman Church began to adopt a more positive, romantic view of sexual relations (at least as far as marriage is concerned). It could no longer be maintained that sexuality, created by God as a part of our human nature, was wholly aberrant to goodness. The council of Cardinals and advisors at Vatican II reformed the notion of sexuality to place it more in line with what they believed the whole breadth of the Roman tradition demanded—a stark reversal of previous sexual ethics, but one that was true to the spirit of the faith.

A loyalist dissident, such as myself, believes that this is how we are proceeding when we criticize the Vatican's theology of the body, as it applies to contraceptives, homosexuality and pre-marital sex. We believe with firm conviction that we are carrying the insights and spirit of Vatican II forward to its logical conclusions. We criticize the procreationist view of the sex act, because it does violence to the notions of love and intimacy that Vatican II elevated as the blessings of marriage.

And it is for this very reason that we stay Roman Catholic. Protestants and party-member Catholics commonly ask me why I remain Roman if I do not believe everything the "Church" teaches. The previous paragraphs provide the perfect answer: because I believe I am carrying forward the banner of the Spirit of God further within, not outside, the tradition that Christ has bequeathed to us.