St. John Henry Newman, Doctor of Conscience

Matthew 13:44-46

Jesus said to his disciples: “The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure buried in a field, which a person finds and hides again, and out of joy goes and sells all that he ha and buys that field. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant searching for fine pearls. When he finds a pearl of great price, he goes and sells all that he has and buys it.”

Here is my homily for the Seventeenth Sunday in Ordinary Time, 2026:

“Jesus said to his disciples: ‘The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure buried in a field, which a person finds and hides again,
and out of joy goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.’” 

When I read this parable, I can’t help but connect it to what some call “Cafeteria Catholicism,” that is, the practice of some Catholics to pick and choose those doctrines they like and embrace, and those they don’t like and reject. Now, when I speak of the doctrines or teachings of the Church, I’m referring to those doctrines that have been defined by the teaching authority of the Church, what we call the magisterium. Magister is the Latin word for “teacher.” It’s where we get the English words “magistrate,” “magisterial,” “master,” and “maestro.” The magisterium is that body within the Church, the pope and those bishops united with him, that define Catholic doctrine for the benefit of the faithful. So, I’m not talking about the personal opinions of a particular priest, religious, bishop, or even pope. I’m talking about the defined teachings or doctrines of the Church – what you will find in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Yet, even on those matters of faith and morals that have been defined by the Church as part of the rich deposit of faith, Cafeteria Catholics feel privileged to pick and choose which they accept and which they reject.

There’s a foundational problem with Cafeteria Catholicism. A central doctrine of Catholic faith is that the Church is the instrument of God’s revelation in Christ. St. Paul himself says so in his letter to the Ephesians (3:8-12) and in his First Letter to Timothy (3:15). There are other Scriptures that also affirm the role of the Church as the instrument of God’s revelation in Christ, and it has been a doctrine of the Church since the days of the Apostles (Acts 15:1-29) and the earliest Church Fathers.

To put it bluntly, to reject the Church as the instrument of God’s revelation is to reject the Catholic faith. Rather than embracing the Church as God’s instrument of revelation, Cafeteria Catholics regard the Church as merely one voice among many, and that it’s the responsibility of the individual believer to sort out this snatch of truth from that snatch of un-truth. Rather than embrace the teachings of the Church as God’s revelation, Cafeteria Catholics regard the teachings of the Church as arbitrary positions that are ultimately optional.

A rather extreme example of Cafeteria Catholicism is that of a doctor with whom I once worked who proudly identified herself as an Irish Catholic and who would never think of missing Mass on Sunday. But she also believed that there was no God. She didn’t see this as a problem, or a contradiction in the slightest. In her mind, her atheism was perfectly in line with her Irish Catholicism, because her Irish Catholicism had nothing to do with actual faith. It was part of her family history, her cultural heritage, and nothing more. The Church’s foundational teaching that “God is” was optional to her Catholicism, just as are so many of the Church’s teachings to every Cafeteria Catholic.

I wonder if those who claim the privilege of Cafeteria Catholicism, of picking and choosing which teachings of the Church they will embrace or reject, have any idea that what they are really rejecting is Catholic faith itself, because they are rejecting a central article of Catholic faith, that of the Church as the instrument of God’s revelation in Christ. If the Church is not the instrument of God’s revelation in Christ then we can only conclude that, either God has not revealed His truth to us, or that each individual believer is the instrument of God’s revelation to that individual believer, and there is no such thing as the revelation of God in Christ. There is only what each individual believes or doesn’t believe. There is no universal truth, no universal gospel. Each of us is saved by our adherence to whatever we personally believe. What matters is not what God has revealed to us about Himself, but what we believe about Him. Which is another way of saying we save ourselves, and don’t really need God to save us. Which is dangerously close to the sin of Adam.

But what of the primacy of conscience? St. John Henry Newman, the English bishop and theologian who famously championed the primacy of conscience to the point where, asked if at a dinner party he would toast the pope, replied: “I shall drink – to the Pope, if you please, – still, to Conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards.” Newman emphasized the primacy of conscience, affirming the teaching of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 that, “He who acts against his conscience loses his soul.” But the conscience of which Newman and the Fourth Lateran Council wrote is the well-formed conscience: a conscience formed in humility, in prayer, and with the guidance of a spiritual director. It is the opposite of a knee-jerk rejection of a doctrine one fails to bother studying and reflecting on in prayer. Much less so is it the rejection of Church doctrine out of spite, or because of personal circumstances, or in response to the demands of a secular culture. Newman criticized fiercely what he called “counterfeit conscience,” defined as the “right to self-will.” The primacy of conscience does not include the license to reject Church teaching in favor of one’s personal preferences. True conscience, the well-formed conscience, requires humility and the desire to learn and to follow God’s will. It is not permission to do whatever one pleases.

I gave an example earlier of Cafeteria Catholicism taken to an extreme. Here is an example of a devout Catholic with a well-formed conscience acting according to his conscience but contrary to what the Church taught at the time. During World War II, the teaching of the Church rejected the option of conscientious objection in time of war. If a legitimate state authority called on the men of its nation to join the army and take up arms, Catholics were obliged to do so. Such was the dilemma faced by Franz Jagerstatter, an Austrian peasant and devout Catholic (he was sacristan at his village parish) who refused to fight for the Nazi regime when they called him up to join their army. The National Socialists were, sadly, the legitimate state authority at the time. Every other devoutly Catholic man in Franz’s village answered the call to join the army. Franz’s parish priest counselled Franz to join the army, according to Church teaching at the time. Franz went to see his bishop, and his bishop counselled Franz to join Hitler’s army. The only person who supported Franz was the only person who had anything to lose by his decision: his wife. Franz held steadfast and refused to fight for Hitler. He was executed by the Nazis for his refusal. Just prior to his execution, he asked his parish priest, “Father, am I sinning?” His parish priest answered correctly when he told him, “No one can sin if they sincerely follow their conscience.”

For any Catholic who has questions about what the Church teaches and why, there are ample resources available. I recommend that every Catholic family have three resources in their home: a Catholic study Bible (the Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition is an excellent study Bible), a reference to the teachings of the Church Fathers (I recommend the three-volume work by Willian Jurgen’s Faith of the Early Fathers) and, of course, the Catechism. I also recommend the website for Catholic Answers (catholic.com). Catholic Answers is an organization dedicated to explaining what the Church teaches and why. One of the advantages of being Catholic is that the Church’s teachings are available to anyone who wants to invest the time in finding out what the Church teaches. But we must not dismiss the advantage and necessity of inquiring into Church teaching with the benefit of a spiritual director or guide.

So, what does this have to do with the parable of the treasure buried in the field? You’ll notice that when the man learned of the treasure buried in the field, he didn’t sneak in and steal the buried treasure. Rather, he bought the field. To get to the kingdom, then, it is necessary to invest in the field. In this analogy, the treasure is the kingdom of God. The field is the revelation of God in Christ. The one who “sells” us the field, or who makes it available to us, is the Church. The Church makes available to us the whole truth of God’s revelation in Christ. To get the kingdom, we need to invest in the whole truth of God’s revelation in Christ, not just those parts we like, or find palatable, or with which we already agree. Let’s not attempt to sneak in and steal the buried treasure. To do so is dishonest. To do so lacks integrity. Buy the field!

What hope is there for Cafeteria Catholics, then? Are they lost? Are they heretics and schismatics bound for perdition? First, let’s acknowledge that we’re all lost. That’s precisely why Christ came to redeem all of us. Let’s acknowledge, too, that the admonition to “be perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48) is a life-long effort for the best of us, and a goal that will require substantial mercy on the part of our Lord when each of us stands before His throne for judgment. Let’s rejoice in the fact that Jesus will be our Judge, for if any man were our judge, we would all be damned to hell in a heartbeat. Our only hope for salvation is that Jesus is our Judge.  

But let’s be honest, too. Honesty impels us to recognize that, while those who reject certain truths revealed by God through His Church maybe Catholic, they are not yet Catholics who have embraced the fullness of God’s revelation in Christ. This is different from those who embrace the fullness of God’s revelation but fail to live it faithfully. That’s all of us. If we hold to the truth, given to us in the Scriptures, in the Church Fathers, and in the consistent teaching of the Church through the centuries, that the Church is the instrument of God’s revelation in Christ, then Cafeteria Catholics reject the fullness of God’s revelation in Christ. That’s not being judgmental. That’s just being honest. If you’re a Cafeteria Catholic, I recommend that you set aside some time to reflect on why you reject a particular teaching, and how this corresponds to your identifying with a faith tradition that regards the Church as the instrument of God’s revelation.

God’s truth is not always easy to accept. God’s truth isn’t meant to accommodate us; it’s meant to save us. It isn’t meant to make us feel good about ourselves by confirming the miraculous coincidence that God’s truth perfectly corresponds to what I already believe. When it comes to the truth, especially God’s truth revealed to us through His Church for the sake of our salvation, it’s best to develop a will that is willing to let go of my own beliefs, even those nearest and dearest to my heart, in favor of conforming my will to the will of God, so that God’s truth becomes the truth of my life.

Be Christ for all. Bring Christ to all. See Christ in all.